dismissed H-1B

dismissed H-1B Case: Computer Programming

๐Ÿ“… Date unknown ๐Ÿ‘ค Company ๐Ÿ“‚ Computer Programming

Decision Summary

The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner failed to specifically identify any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the appeal, as required by regulation 8 C.F.R. ยง 103.3(a)(l)(v). The petitioner indicated they would submit a brief and/or evidence but did not do so.

Criteria Discussed

Failure To Identify Specific Error Of Law Or Fact

Sign up free to download the original PDF

View Full Decision Text
MATTER OF RS-, INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: SEPT. 25,2015 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a software development and information technology services company, seeks to 
employ the Beneficiary as a computer programmer and to extend her classification as a 
nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation. See section 1 01 (a)( 15 )(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. ยง 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). The matter is now before us on 
appeal. The appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
The Petitioner submitted the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, and marked box "b" at "Part 
3. Information About the Appeal or Motion" to indicate that a brief and/or additional evidence would 
be sent to our office within 30 days. We fully and in-detail reviewed the Form I-290B and the 
accompanying documents. Notably, we did not receive a brief and/or additional evidence within the 
allotted timeframe (or thereafter). Accordingly, the record of proceeding is deemed complete as 
currently constituted. 
The Petitioner did not identify any specific error by the Director. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
ยง 103.3(a)(l)(v) states in pertinent part: "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." In the instant case, the Petitioner has not specifically 
identified any erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of fact as a basis for the appeal and thus, 
the appeal is summarily dismissed in accordance with 8 C.F.R. ยง 1 03.3(a)(l )(v).
1 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. ยง 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
Cite as Matter of RS-, Inc., ID# 14980 (AAO Sept. 18, 20 15) 
1 
As the appeal will be summarily dismissed, we will not discuss any additional deficiencies we observe in the record of 
proceeding. 
Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial

MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.

Avoid This in My Petition →

No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.