dismissed H-1B Case: Cleaning Service

id- tkkte4it.o 
prevesh8dcarly 811wamanted 
invasion of ~emnal oriww 
PUBWC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Rm. A3042 
Wash~ngton, DC 20539 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: EAC 03 030 52150 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: APR 0 5 
PETITION: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 1 Ol(a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 
 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) 
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. 
fiinistrative Appeals Office 
EAC 03 030 52150 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the nonimmigrant visa petition and on September 16, 
2003, the petitioner filed a motion to reconsider. The director dismissed the motion. The matter is now 
before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner is a cleaning service that seeks to employ the beneficiary as a sales manager. The petitioner 
endeavors to classify the beneficiary as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to section 
lOl(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. fj 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b). The 
director denied the petition on the basis that the proffered position did not meet the definition of a specialty 
occupation. 
The petitioner submitted a timely Form EOIR-29, in lieu of Form I-290B, on April 10, 2004 and indicated 
that a brief and/or statement would be submitted after filing the Notice of Appeal. As of this date, however, 
the AAO has not received any additional evidence into the record. Therefore, the record is complete. 
An officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily dismiss any appeal when the party concerned fails to 
identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. 8 C.F.R. 
4 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
On the Form EOIR-29, the petitioner fails to specify how the director made any erroneous conclusion of law or 
statement of fact in denying the petition. As the petitioner presents no additional evidence on appeal to overcome 
the decision of the director, the appeal will be summarily dismissed in accordance with 
8 C.F.R. 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
The burden of proof in this proceeding rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 4 1361. 
The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.