dismissed EB-2 Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
DATE: AUG 3 0 2013 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. , MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
PETITION : Immigrant 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: 
INSTRUCTIONS : 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. 
This is a non-precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor 
establish agency policy through non-precedent decisions. If you believe the AAO incorrectly 
applied current law or policy to your case or if you seek to present new facts for consideration , 
you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen, respectively. Any motion must be 
filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) within 33 days of the date of this decision. 
Please review the Form I-290B instructions at http://www.uscis.gov/forms for the latest 
information on fee, filing location, and other requirements. See also 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. Do 
not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Thank you, 
/./'"·-- ~ 
/ £) 
/ / ~ - -
/ Ron Rosenberg 
\_ · Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition and the 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
summarily dismissed . 
The petitioner seeks to classify the beneficiary pursuant to section 203(b )(2) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2) as a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree. The director determined that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the 
beneficiary possessed the required educational credentials as of the priority date. 
On appeal, counsel merely stated that additional materials would be provided that would establish 
that the beneficiary meets the education requirement of the ETA Form 9089 and is eligible for a 
second preference classification . 
Counsel dated the appeal June 26, 2013. He indicated that a brief and/or additional evidence would 
be submitted to the AAO within 30 days. As of this date, more 45 days later, the AAO has 
received nothing further, and the regulation requires that any brief shall be submitted directly to the 
AAO. 8 C.F.R. §§ 103.3(a)(2)(vii) and (viii). 
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 fact for the 
appeal. 
Counsel here has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial and has n9t provided any 
additional evidence. The appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.