dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
U.S. Department of Homeland ~turlty 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration SerVices 
Office of Admin istrative Appeals 
20 Massa~:h.usetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship · 
and Immigration 
Services 
DATE: SEP 2 5 2013 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETffiQN: 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. § 11S3(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
iNSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of theAdministrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. 
This is a non-precedent deci.sion. 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, yo:u 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 l-290B) 
within 33 days of the date of this decision. Please review the Form 1·2908 instructions at 
http !//www.usds.gov/foniis for the latest information on fee, filing location, and other requirements. 
See al~o 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. Do not file a motion directly witb the AAO. 
Thank you, 
</(it­
~ ~--
Ron Rosenberg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6) NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 · 
DISCUSSIO~: Tbe Director, Texas Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition. The 
petitioner filed a motion to reopen and reconsider, whi<:h the director dismissed. the matter is now 
· before the Administrative Appeals Office {AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
· The petitioner seeks classification p11rsuant to ~ection 203(b)(Z) 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 State~. T)le director found 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 
St~tes. 
In Part 2 of the Form 1-2908, Notice of Appeal or Motiort, the. petitioner checked box ''C" indicating 
''No supplemental brief and/or · additional evidence will be submitted." Therefore, the appellate 
subn,.li.ssion co11stitutes his entire appeaL · the petitioner, however, did not submit an accompanying 
btief.or other documentation with the Forn:t I-290:5. · 
Pi:lJ:t 3 of the Form I-290B inCludes a space to. "[p]rovide a statement explaining any erroneous 
conclusion of law or fact in the decision being appeaied;'' the petitioner states: 
I have forwarded all the facts and supported affidavits or evidences in your office since I 
applied for NIW. Please reconsider afl evidences that had been submitted previously. I am 
appealing in your good office that this i:ippeaJ of reopeJJing the case will have at least (8) 
months befor [sic] its [siC] another decision. I hap investment already and I will be disposing 
them a.nd jt will take a while. I am appealing you [sic] humanitarian consideration to have at 
least a little longer period of time to properly m(lnage and dispose some .investment and 
property. 
The petitioner's statement fails to identify any erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the director's 
decision. The petitioner has not even expressed disagreement with ~he director's decision. the . . 
petitioner does not specifically challenge any of the director's findings; or point to specific errors in 
the director's analyses of the documentary evidence. Iii addition, the petitioner does not explain how 
the specific documentation that he submitted supports a finding of eligibility. 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l){v), an appeal shall be summarily dismissed if the party coneerned 
fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law .or statemer~t of fact for the appeal. The 
petitioner has not specifically addressed the reasons 'stated for denial and has not provided any 
addit_ional evidence pertaining to his eligibility for the classification sought. The appeal mus.t 
therefore be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: -· ·~ - .-- . .. . . The appeal ~s dismissed.