dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Health Services

identifyingdata deletedto
reventclearlyunwarr~ted
fnvasionof personalprivacy
u.s. Department of Homeland Security
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000
Washington, DC 20529
u.s.Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER
-PUBLIC COpy
SRC 05 800 32882
n ,~
"\?J
MAR 07 2007
Date:
INRE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
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:
SELF-REPRESENTED
INSTRUCTIONS:
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office.
~~~\)~
c' \J~bert P. Wiemann, Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
Page 2
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas
Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be
dismissed.
The petitioner seeks classification pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2), as an alien of exceptional ability or a member of the professions
holding an advanced degree. The petitioner seeks employment in health services, providing
information wave therapy. The petitioner asserts that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer,
and thus of a labor certification, is in the national interest of the United States. The director found that
the petitioner had not submitted an evaluation of her foreign degree (the record contains an evaluation
submitted after the director's decision and prior to appeal) and that the petitioner had not established
that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer would be in the national interest of the United
States.
The Form 1-290B, Notice of Appeal to the Administrative Appeals Office, indicates both that a brief
and supporting evidence are attached and that the petitioner would submit a brief and/or evidence to the
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) within 30 days. The appeal was not, however, submitted with a
brief or additional evidence. The petitioner dated the appeal April 20, 2006. As of this date, more than
10 months later, the AAO has received nothing further.
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.
Counsel here has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial and has not provided any
additional evidence. She has not even expressed disagreement with the director's decision. The appeal
must therefore be summarily dismissed.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.