dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Transportation Engineering

(b)(6)
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave ., N.W., MS 2090 
Washingion, DC 2052?-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
·and Immigration 
Services 
DATE: FEB 1 ~ 2013 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
IN RE: 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. Please note that all documents have 
been returned to the 9ffice that originally decided your case. Please also note that any furt~er inquiry must be 
made to that office . 
. Thank you, 
;Aoe_NJY1Utu . · 
(YRon Rosenberg 
V Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition. The matter is now· before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The 
appeal will be rejected. · 
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 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 had not established that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer 
would be in the national interestof the United States. · 
The·regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2) provides; in pertinent p(lrt: 
(v) Improperly filed appeal-
(A) Appeal filed by person or entity not entitled to file it-
(1) Rejection without refund of filing fee. An appeal filed by a 
. person or entity not entitled to file it must be rejected as 
improperly· filed. In such a case, any filing fee the Service has 
accepted will not be refunded. · 
(2) Appeal by attorney or representative without proper Form 
G-28-
(i) General . . If an appeal· is filed by an attorney . 
or representative without a properly executed Notice 
of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative 
(Form G~28) entitling that ·person to file the appeal, 
the appeal is considered improperly filed. In such a 
case, any filing fee the Service has accepted will n.ot 
be refunded regardless.of the action-taken, 
(ii) . When favorab.le action warranted . ... 
(iii) . When favorable action not warranted. If the 
reviewing official decides fa~orable action is not 
warranted with respect to an otherwise properly filed 
appeal, that o~icial shall . ask the attorney · or 
representative to submit Form G-28 directly to the 
[ AAO]. The official shall also forward the appeal_ 
and the relating record of proceeding to the [AAO]. 
(b)(6)
,. 
Page 3 
The appeal may be .considered properly filed as of its 
. original ftling date if the attorney or representative 
submits a properly executed Form G-28 entitling that 
person to file the appeal. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. §.103.2(a)(l) provides: 
. Filing. (1) Preparation and submission. Every benefit request or other document 
submitted to DHS must be executed and filed in accordance with the form instructions 
... such instructions are incorporated into the regulations requiring its submission. 
The instructions for the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, advise the appellant that; 
If you wish, you may be represented at no expense to the U.S. Government by an 
I . . 
attorney or other duly authorized representative. Your attorney or representative must 
· submit a Form G-28 with the appeal or motion. If the appeal or motion is filed without a 
properly executed Form G~28, it will be dismissed or rejected. 
Additionally, the r(!gulation at 8 C.F.R. § 292.4(a), as well as the instructions to the Form G-28, 
provides that: · 
An appearance must be filed on the appropriate form as prescribed by DHS [Department · 
qf Homeland Security] by the attorney or accredited representative appearing in each 
case. The form must be properly completed and signed by the petitioner, applicant, or 
respondent to auth.orize representation in order for the appearance to be recognized by 
DHS. The appearance will be recognized by the specific immigration component of 
DHS in which it was filed until the conclusion of the matter for which it was entered. 
This does not change the requirement ihat a new.form must be filed with an appeal filed 
with the Administrative Appeals Office of USC IS [emphasis added]. 
Finally, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l )(iii) states, in pertinent part: 
(B) Meaning ofaffected party. For purposes of this section and §§ 103.4 and 103.5 of 
this part, affected party (in addition to the Service) means the person or entity with legal 
standing in a prqceeding. It does not include the beneficiary of a visa petition. 
Only an affected party, a person or entity with legal standing, may file an appeal of an unfavorable 
decision. Form I-290B is signed by . However, did not submit 
a new 
Form G-28 with the appeal authorizing him to act on behalf of the petitioner. Instead, 
sub~itted a copy of a previously submitted Form G-28 dated March 8, 2012, prior to the filing of 
the appeal. 
(b)(6)
l: • I 
Page 4 
On December 11, 2012, the director requested to submit a new and duly executed Form 
G-28 in accordance with the regulation ~t 8 C.F.R. § 292.4(a) and the instructions for Form I-290B 
and Form G-28 . The request specifically advised to submit the.new Form G-28 directly 
to the AAO . As of this date, more than two months later, has failed to submit Form G-
28 to the AAO as requested by the director. 
As has failed to provide a new Form G-28 authorizing h~ to act on behalf of the 
petitioner in the appellate stage of this proceeding, he cannot be considered as the petitioner's legal 
representative . . Accordingly, the appeal has not been filed by the petitioner or by any entity with 
legal standing in the proceeding. Therefore, the ·appeal has not been properly filed and must be 
rejected. · ' ·· · 
In the alternative, the appeal will be summarily dismissed. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 
1 03.3(a)(l )(v) provides that "[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." 
In Part 2 of Form I-290B, checked the box indicating that no brief and/or evidence 
would be submitted in support of the appeal. In addition, submitted a November 19, 
2012 letter stating: "NO BRIEF TO BE SUBMITTED." Part 3 of Form I-290B includes a space 
for the petitioner to "[p]rovide a statement explaining any erroneous conclusion of law or fact in 
the decision being appealed ." states: "This decision constitutes an abuse of 
discretion as it was not based on the proper NYSDOT standard and did not properly consider all 
evidence submitted." statement fails to identify any erroneous conclusion of law or 
fact in the director's decision. does not specifically challenge any of the director's 
findings or point to specific errors in the director's analyses of the documentary evidence. 
Further, does not identify the specific evidence that the director did not properly 
consider. In addition, does not explain how the specific documentation that the 
petitioner submitted supports a finding of eligibility. A passing reference without substantive 
arguments is insufficient to raise that ground on appeal. Desravines v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 343 
Fed.Appx. 433, 435 (111h Cir. 2009). 
In this matter, the petitioner has not identified as a proper basis for the appeal an erroneous 
conclusion of law or a statement of fact in the director's decision. 
Therefore, if not rejected, the appeal would be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.