dismissed EB-2 Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
v~s;: Departmeut :or Homeland:Sfturlty 
u ~s: Ciiiz~nship a~d ~~;Digratio~ services 
· Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 · 
Washington , DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenshi .... . .... p 
.and Innnigra!iQn 
Services · , . 
!'. 
DATE: OFFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
FEB 2 8 2013 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Inimigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding .an 
Advanced Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b )(2) of the 
. Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
. INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative .Appeals Office in your case. All of the 
documents related to this matter.have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please 
be advised that any further inquiry that you might ha~~ concerning your case must be made to that office. 
If you believe the AAO inappropriately applied the law in reaching its decision, or you have additional 
infqrmation that· you wish to have consider~d, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen 
in accordance with the instructions·on Forin I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $630. The 
specific requirements for filing such a motion can be found at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. Do not file any motion 
directly with the AAO. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R: § 103.5(a)(l)(i) requires any motion to be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
. I 
~~~ 
Ron Rosenberg 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
(b)(6)
; . 
Page 2 
.. 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigr~t visa petition was denied by the Director, 
Nebraska Service center. The director reopened the matter sua sponte, and again denied the 
petition. The petitioner appealed the denial to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO). The 
appeal will be summarily dism!ssed. ! 
The petitioner seeks to classify the beneficiary pursuapt to section 203(b )(2) of the hnmigration and 
. Nationality Act (theAct), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2) as a professional holding an advanced degree .. The 
director determined that the petitioner failed to· demonstrate that the beneficiary possessed an 
. advanced degree or a bachelors degree coupled with ~ve years of experience as of the priority date. 
On appeal, the petitioner exhorts the AAO to examin~ a credential evaluation which had previou5ly 
been provided to-the director. The petitioner does not provide any new evidence or agruments on 
appeal addressing the beneficiary's ineligibility. 
I 
· As stated in 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v), an appeal shall be summarily dismissed if the party 
concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous: conclusion of law or statement of fa~t for the 
appeal. 
The petitioner here has not specifically addressed the: reasons stated for denial and has not provided 
any additional evidence. He has not even expressed disagreement with the director's decision. The 
appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed. , 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.