dismissed
EB-2 NIW
dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Nephrology
Decision Summary
The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner's counsel failed to identify any specific erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the director's decision. The counsel merely repeated vague assertions that the petitioner's work was important, without providing a substantive rebuttal to the director's findings, which is insufficient grounds for an appeal.
Criteria Discussed
National Interest Waiver Substantial Intrinsic Merit National Influence Leading Roles Pioneering Publications Significant Contributions
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
U.S.Departmentof HomelandSecurity U.S.CitizenshipandImmigrationServices . - AdtninistrativeAppealsOffice (AAO) identify mg ma ac meo 1 20MassachusettsAve.,N.W.,MS2090 invasionat pcisonalpnvac) U.S.Citizenship PUBLIC COPY and Immigration Services DATE: g j "f 20รลฝ OFFICE:NEBRASKASERVICECENTER IN RE: Petitioner: Beneficiary: PETITION: ImmigrantPetitionfor AlienWorkerasaMemberof theProfessionsHoldinganAdvanced DegreeoranAlienof ExceptionalAbility Pursuantto Section203(b)(2)of theImmigration andNationalityAct,8 U.S.C.ยง 1153(b)(2) ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: INSTRUCTIONS: Enclosedpleasefind thedecisionof theAdministrativeAppealsOffice in yourcase.All of thedocuments relatedto thismatterhavebeenreturnedtotheofficethatoriginallydecidedyourcase.Pleasebeadvisedthat anyfurtherinquirythatyoumighthaveconcerningyourcasemustbemadetothatoffice. If you believe the law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional information that you wish to haveconsidered,you may file a motion to reconsideror a motion to reopen. The specific requirementsfor filing such a requestcan be found at 8 C.F.R. ยง 103.5. All motions must be submittedto theoffice thatoriginally decidedyourcaseby filing aFormI-290B,Noticeof Appealor Motion, with a feeof $630. Pleasebeawarethat8 C.F.R.ยง 103.5(a)(1)(i)requiresthatanymotionmustbefiled within30daysof thedecisionthatthemotionseekstoreconsideror reopen. Thankyou, erryRhew Chief,AdministrativeAppealsOffice www.users.gov Page2 DISCUSSION: TheDirector, NebraskaServiceCenter,deniedtheemployment-basedimnugrantvisa petition.ThematterisnowbeforetheAdministrativeAppealsOffice(AAO) onappeal.TheAAO will summarilydismisstheappeal. Thepetitionerseeksclassificationpursuantto section203(b)(2)of theImmigrationandNationalityAct (theAct), 8 U.S.C.ยง 1153(b)(2),asa memberof the professionsholdingan advanceddegree.The petitionerseeksemploymentasa physicianspecializingin nephrology.Thepetitionerassertsthatan exemptionfromtherequirementof ajob offer,andthusof alaborcertification,isin thenationalinterest of theUnitedStates.Thedirectorfoundthatthepetitionerqualifiesfor classificationasa memberof theprofessionsholdinganadvanceddegree,butthatthepetitionerhasnotestablishedthatanexemption fromtherequirementof ajob offerwouldbein thenationalinterestof theUnitedStates. On the FormI-290BNoticeof Appeal,counselcheckeda box reading"My brief and/oradditional evidenceis attached."Counseldid not indicatethatanyfuturesupplementwouldfollow. Therefore, the initial appellatesubmissionconstitutesthe entireappeal.Thepetitionersubmittedno exhibitson appealexceptfor acopyof thedenialnotice. TheFormI-290Bincludesaspacefor thepetitionerto "[p]rovidea statementexplaininganyerroneous conclusionof lawor factin thedecisionbeingappealed."Counselstates: The record reflects through [the petitioner's] leading roles at prominentmedical institutionsalongwith herhistoryof originalandpioneeringpublicationsandsignificant contributionstothefieldof nephrologythat[thepetitioner]hasdemonstratedthat(1)her work hashadsubstantialintrinsicmerit;(2) the impactof herwork hasspreadbeyond his [sic] hospitalcommunityand had a significantnationalinfluencein improving healthcare;and (3) [the petitioner's] abilities are extraordinaryand standaboveher peers,such that a waiver of the labor certification processwould be in the national interest. Counseldidnotelaborateasto thenatureof theclaimed"leadingroles"and"significantcontributions." Thedirector,in thedenialnotice,hadquestionedearlier,similarclaimsby counsel.Counselcannot rebutthedirector'sfindingssimplyby repeatingthevagueassertionthatthepetitioner'sworkhasbeen important. The director had acknowledgedthe intrinsic merit and national scopeof the petitioner's medical researchwork, andthereforecounselassertspointsthatthedirectorhadalreadystipulated. In a separatestatementaccompanyingtheappealform,counselacknowledgesthatthemedicalsocieties to which the petitionerbelongsdo not requireoutstandingachievements,but statesthat "this is the norm." The director,however,did not raisethe issueof the petitioner'smembershipsasa basisfor denial. Counselfurtherassertsgenerallythatthepetitioner"hasjudgedthework of evenseniorpeers" andthat"therearetestimonialssubmittedshowingthat shehasbeenindispensable"to the university departmentwhereshethenworked. Counseldoesnot,however,allegeanyspecificfactualor legal Page3 errorsor otherdeficienciesin thedirector'sdecision.Counselmerelyassertsthat,given(unidentified) "substantialevidence"of thepetitioner's(unspecified)achievements,thedirectorshouldhaveapproved the petition. The director,in the denialnotice,hadacknowledgedthe "testimonials"mentionedby counsel,butfoundthemtobeunsubstantiated.Counseldoesnotrespondtothisfinding. Becausecounselhasfailedto identifyspecificallyanerroneousconclusionof lawor a statementof fact asabasisfor theappeal,theAAO mustsummarilydismisstheappeal. ORDER: Theappealisdismissed.
Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial
MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.
Avoid This in My Petition →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.