dismissed EB-3 Case: Skilled Worker

Identifym: ' -- deleted to 
nwm -1 -lwarranted 
irr vaSiOL ul pcxs0d privacy 
PUBLlC COPY 
U.S. Department of IIomeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
'bb 
EAC 04 213 52395 
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. 8 1153(b)(3) 
IN 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. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the immigrant visa petition. The matter 
is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be summarily 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. fj 1153(b)(3), as a skilled worker. The director determined that the 
petitioner failed to establish its ability to pay the proffered wage. The director further determined that the 
petitioner failed to demonstrate that the beneficiary had four years of supervisory work experience and that 
the beneficiary attended a trade school as required by the Form ETA 750 filed in the instant case. The 
director denied the petition accordingly. 
On appeal, counsel indicated that he would submit a brief and/or evidence to the AAO within 30 days and 
stated that certain facts contained in the director's January 3 1, 2005 decision are erroneous. 
Counsel dated the appeal March 3, 2005. As of this date, more than 19 months later, the AAO has received 
nothng further. The AAO sent a fax to counsel on October 3, 2006 informing counsel that no separate brief 
andlor evidence was received, to confirm whether or not he would send anythng else in this matter, and as a 
courtesy, providing him with five (5) days to respond. To date, more than two weeks later, no reply has been 
received. 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. fj 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 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 dismissed.