dismissed EB-3 Case: Information Technology

MATTER OF M- LTD. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: MAR. 22, 2016 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, an IT services company, seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a technical lead. It requests 
classification of the Beneficiary as a skilled worker under the third preference immigrant classification. 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) § 203(b)(3)(A)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(3)(A)(i). This 
employment-based immigrant classification allows a U.S. employer to sponsor a foreign national for 
lawful permanent resident status to work in a position that requires at least two years of training or 
expenence. 
The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the pet1t10n. The Director determined that the 
Beneficiary did not meet the minimum educational requirements of the job offered as set forth on the 
labor certification. Following the Petitioner's motion(s) to reopen and reconsider, the Director affirmed 
his denial ofthe petition. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. We will summarily dismiss the appeal. 
The Petitioner's appeal was filed on December 30, 2015. In Part 3 of the Form I-290B, as well as in 
an accompanying letter from counsel, the Petitioner indicated that a brief and/or additional evidence 
would be submitted to us within 30 days. Part 4 of the Form I-290B instructed the Petitioner, in 
pertinent part, as follows: 
On a separate sheet of paper, you must provide a statement regarding the basis for the 
appeal or motion. You must include your name and A-number or US CIS ELlS Account 
Number on the top of each sheet. 
Appeal: Provide a statement that specifically identifies an erroneous conclusion of law 
or fact in the decision being appealed. 
(Emphases in the original.) Despite these instructions on the Form I-290B, the Petitioner did not 
provide any statement in support of the appeal. Nor was any brief or additional evidence submitted 
within 30 days of the appeal, or any time up to the date of this decision. No further communication has 
been received from the Petitioner or counsel since the filing of the appeal on December 30, 2015. 
Matter of M- Ltd. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v) provides that an appeal shall be srnnmarily dismissed "wh~n 
the party concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for 
the appeal." 
In this case the Petitioner has not identified any erroneous conclusion of law or any erroneous factual 
findings in the Director's decision. The Petitioner has not provided any additional evidence to be 
considered on appeal. In accordance with 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v), therefore, the appeal will be 
summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
Cite as Matter of M- Ltd., ID# 17 445 (AAO Mar. 22, 20 16) 
2