dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Mathematics Teacher

(b)(6)
DATE: NOV 1 8 2014 OFFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary : 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citi zenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office {AAO) 
20 Massachusett s Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washingt on, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
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 .usci s.gov/form s for the latest information on fee, filing location, and other requirements. 
See also 8 C.F .R. § 1 03 .5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Thank you , 
rlf:~~:~;trative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. We will summarily 
dismiss the appeal. 
The petitioner seeks classification under 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 
petitioner seeks employment as a middle school mathematics teacher at 
_ Arizona. 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 qualifies for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but 
that the petitioner has not established that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer would be in 
the national interest of the United States. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v) states, in pertinent pmt, "[a]n officer to whom an appeal is 
taken shall summarily dismiss any appeal when the party concerned fails to identify specifically any 
erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal." 
On the Form I-290B Notice of Appeal, filed on February 27, 2014, the petitioner indicated that a brief 
and/or additional evidence would be forthcoming within thirty days. To date, eight months later, 
careful review of the record reveals no subsequent submission; all other documentation in the record 
predates the issuance of the notice of decision. 
The statement submitted with the appeal alleges that "the Decision is based on enoneous conclusion of 
law and erroneous conclusion and/or statement of fact," but the petitioner did not identify these errors or 
show that the director 's conclusions and statements were, in fact, erroneous. The bare assertion that the 
director somehow ened in rendering the decision is not sufficient basis for a substantive appeal. 
Because the petitioner has failed to identify specifically an enoneous conclusion of law or a statement 
of fact as a basis for the appeal, we must summarily dismiss the appeal. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.