dismissed EB-3 Case: Skilled Worker

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
kdentif'ying data C~i2kd.n ..i 
prevent ~~eztrl~ onwarriulted 
~MPISIIOQ of personal privacy 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
p, ,,F* 
,.@' t, 
PUBLIC COPY 
Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: 
MAR 2 8 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. 5 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, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Acting Director (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 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. 5 1153(b)(3) as a skilled worker. The director determined that the 
petitioner failed to establish its ability to pay the proffered wage and 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 
the following: "I will send the brief and/or evidences [sic] to the [AAO] within 30 days." 
Counsel dated the appeal September 3, 2004. As of this date, more than 18 months later, the AAO has 
received nothing further. The AAO sent a fax to counsel on March 8, 2006 informing counsel that no 
separate brief and/or evidence was received to confirm whether or not he would send anything else in this 
matter, and as a courtesy, providing him with five (5) days to respond. Counsel responded by checking a box 
that he did not file an additional brief or evidence and signed his name. 
As stated in 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(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. He has not even expressed disagreement with the director's decision. The appeal must therefore be 
summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.