dismissed EB-3 Case: Moving And Storage

laentifylng oats Ge~$:w tcr 
prevent dearly unwsrragter 
bdn of wrsonal prlv~ 
pmcIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER 
EAC 05 248 52073 
 Date: SEP 1 3 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. 9 1 153(b)(3) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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. 
~bbert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The director denied the employment-based preference visa petition, and the matter is now before 
the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner is a moving and storage company. It seeks to employ the beneficiary permanently in the United 
States as a shipping and receiving clerk. 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 beneficiary is away and he needs more time to prepare any additional available 
evidence. Counsel also indicates on the Form I-290B that she is not submitting a separate brief. Counsel dated the 
appeal February 25,2006. As of this date, more than 6 months later, the AAO has received nothing further. 
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. 
Counsel here has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial and has not provided any additional evidence. 
She has not even expressed disagreement with the director's decision. The appeal must therefore be summarily 
dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.