dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Office of Administrative Appeals 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
DATE: Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
JAN 1 0 2014 
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 : 
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.uscis.gov/forms for the latest information on fee, filing location, and other requirements. 
See also 8 C.P.R.§ 103.5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Thank you, 
)J D udnciu 
D Ron Rosenberg 
"\ ~ Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition and the 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. 1 The appeal will be 
summarily 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 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 had not established 
that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer would be in the national interest of the United 
States. 
In Part 2 of the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, the petitioner checked box "A" indicating 
"My brief and/or additional evidence is attached." Therefore, the appellate submission constitutes 
the entire appeal. Part 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 appealed." The petitioner states: 
"Please see attached documents." The petitioner, however , did not submit a brief or other 
documentation in support of the appeal. 
The petitioner's appellate submission fails to identify any erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the 
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. In addition, the 
petitioner does not explain how the specific documentation that she 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 concerned 
fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. The 
petitioner has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial and has not provided any 
additional evidence pertaining to her eligibility for the classification sought. The appeal must 
therefore be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
1 The petitioner simultaneously filed two Forms I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, on June 3, 2013 , 
and __) . In Part 2 of both forms, the petitioner checked box B, indicating that she was "filing an appeal." 
This decision addresses A separate decision has been issued addressing the merits of