dismissed EB-3 Case: Software Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF A-C-C-, INC. 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JULY 19,2016 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a software consulting and development business, seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a 
software engineer. It requests classification of the Beneficiary as a skilled worker under the third 
preference immigrant classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), section 
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 2 years of training or experience. 
The Acting Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the petition. The Director determined that the 
record did not establish the Petitioner's ability to pay the proffered wage to the Beneficiary from the 
visa petition's priority date forward. Thereafter, the Director affirmed her denial of the visa petition 
in response to the Petitioner's motions to reopen and reconsider. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director did not 
consider the record as a whole in responding to its motions, but simply reiterated the reasons she had 
originally provided for the denial of the petition. Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
On May 23, 2016, we sent the Petitioner a notice of intent to dismiss (NO !D) the appeal, informing 
it that a review of online business records indicated that it might no longer be in business and that we 
required evidence of its continued existence, operation, and good standing before considering its 
appeal. The NOID also notified the Petitioner that additional evidence was needed to establish its 
ability to pay the Beneficiary the proffered wage of $85,758 from the visa petition's June 5, 2002, 
priority date forward. The notice requested the Petitioner's submission of its tax returns for the 
years 2004 through 2015, as well as any Forms W-2, Wage and Tax Statements, it had issued to the 
Beneficiary during this same time period. The NOID gave the Petitioner 33 days in which to submit 
a response and notified it that we might dismiss the appeal if no response was forthcoming. 
As of the date of this decision, the Petitioner has not responded to the NOID. Not submitting 
requested evidence that precludes a material line of inquiry is grounds for denying the petition. 
8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l4). Since the Petitioner has not responded to the NOID, the appeal will be 
summarily dismissed as abandoned pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l3)(i). 
Malter of A-C-C-, Inc. 
In visa petition proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration 
benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter o[Otiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 
(BIA 2013). Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed as abandoned pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(13). 
Cite as Matter of A-C-C-, Inc., ID# 18103 (AAO July 19, 2016) 
2