dismissed EB-3 Case: Skilled Worker

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly ~mwmtsd 
invasion of personal privacy 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Ifomeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave.. N.W., Rm. 3000 
Wash~ngton, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
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. $ 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. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
EAC-04-157-53117 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition. The matter is 
now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks to classify the beneficiary pursuant to section 203(b)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 3 1153(b)(3) as a slulled worker. The director determined that the petitioner could not 
demonstrate its ability to pay the beneficiary the proffered wage fiom the priority date until the beneficiary 
obtains permanent residence. 
On appeal, the petitioner provided, "We wish to submit evidence that we do have the ability to pay and to have 
the Administrative Appeals Unit reconsider the denial. We will submit a brief with 30 days and supporting 
documentation." 
The appeal was filed on May 18, 2005. As of this date, more than seventeen months after filing the appeal, the 
AAO has received nothng further. 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. 3 103.3(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 here has not addressed the reasons stated for denial and has not provided any additional evidence to 
identify the specific erroneous conclusion of law. The appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.