dismissed H-1B Case: Business Analysis

.
MATTER OF S-T- INC 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JUNE 1, 2017 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKE
R 
The Petitioner, a trucking company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a part-time 
"business analyst" under the H-IB nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). The 
H-1B program allows a U.S. employer to temporarily employ a qualified foreign worker in a 
position that requires both (a) the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge and (b) the attainment of a bachelor's or higher ·degree in the specific specialty (or its 
equivalent) as a minimum prerequisite for entry into the position. 
After initially approving the petition, the Director of the Vermont Service Center issued a notice of 
intent to revoke (NOIR). The Director revoked the approval of the petition finding that the 
Petitioner did not respond to the NOIR. The Petitioner filed a combined motion to reopen and 
reconsider, asserting that it submitted a response to the NOIR. The Director revoked the approval of 
the petition on additional grounds. The matter is now before us on appeal. Upon review, we will 
summarily dismiss the appeal. 
An officer will summarily dismiss an appeal when the Petitioner does not identify specifically any 
erroneous conclusion oflaw or statement of fact for the appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
On appeal , the Petitioner did not provide a statement in support of the appeal that specifically 
identifies an erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the decision. On the Form I-290B, Notice of 
Appeal or Motion, the Petitioner stated that a brief or additional evidence would be submitted within 
30 days of filing. However, we have not received anything further from the Petitioner to date 
regarding this appeal. 1 Because the Petitioner has not identified any specific, erroneous conclusion 
of law or statement of fact in the Director's decision below, the appeal must be dismissed. 
1 
The Petitioner filed another appeal 1 in connection with the Director's decision on its motion, and 
submitted a brief. We will issue a decision for that appeal simultaneously to address the Petitioner ' s argument regarding 
the Director's revocation . 
Matter of S-T- Inc 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v). 
Cite as Matter ofS-T- Inc, ID# 343711 (AAO June 1, 2017) 
2