dismissed EB-2 Case: Unspecified

DAT"DEC 0 8 201fffice: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
IN 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W .. MS 209() 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
u.s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
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. § I I 53(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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 have 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 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen 
in accordance with the instructions on Form 1-290B, 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. § I 03.5(a)(I )(i) requires any motion to be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
Ron Rosenberg 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, 
Nebraska Service Center, and 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, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2), as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an alien of exceptional ability. The director determined that the petitioner failed to 
submit sufficient evidence establishing that it has the ability to pay the proffered wage and that 
the beneficiary has obtained the required sixty (60) months experience in the job offered prior to 
the priority date of August 10,2010. Accordingly, the director denied the petition. 
On appeal, the petitioner stated that a brief and/or evidence would be submitted within 30 days of 
the Notice of Appeal, which was received by United States Citizenship and Immigration Services 
on October 17, 20 II. 
The petitioner dated the appeal October 13, 2011. As of today, over one year 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)(1)(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. 
A review of the director's decision reveals that the director accurately set forth a legitimate basis 
for the denial of the petition. The petitioner failed to make any argument or submit any new 
evidence on appeal. Accordingly, the appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.