dismissed EB-3 Case: Automotive Service

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
FILE: - Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER 
EAC 03 207 51982 
Date: 1 9 2006 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant petition for Alien Worker as a Skilled Worker or Professional pursuant to section 
203(b)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 3 1153(b)(3) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS : 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
\ 
Administrative Appeals Office 
*' 
- 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the employment-based visa petition, and the matter is now 
before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner is an auto service company for foreign and domestic autos. It seeks to employ the beneficiary 
permanently in the Uiited States as an automobile mechanic. As required by statute, a Form ETA 750, 
Application for Alien Employment Certification approved by the Department of Labor, accompanied the 
petition. The director determined that the petitioner had not established that it had the continuing ability to 
pay the beneficiary the proffered wage beginning on the priority date of the visa petition and denied the 
petition accordingly. 
On appeal, counsel states that the director erred in his decision that the petitioner did not have the ability to 
pay the proffered wage. In the appeal dated January 5, 2004, counsel states that she is sending a brief andfor 
evidence to the AAO within 30 days; however, the AAO has received no further evidence. In response to a 
FAX sent by the AAO enquiring as to any further materials that might have been submitted to the AAO, 
counsel sent the AAO correspondence dated September 14, 2006 and stated that she withdrew as the 
petitioner's attorney of record.' 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(l)(v), an appeal shall be suminarily dismissed if the party concerned fails to 
identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. 
Counsel here has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial and has not provided any additional 
evidence. The appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is summarily dismissed. 
Thus, the petitioner is self-represented.