dismissed
H-1B
dismissed H-1B Case: Computer Science
Decision Summary
The appeal was summarily dismissed on procedural grounds. The Petitioner failed to identify a specific erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal, as required by regulation, and did not submit a promised brief or additional evidence to support their case.
Criteria Discussed
Failure To Identify Erroneous Conclusion Of Law Or Fact
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services MATTER OF S-S-USA, LLC APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office DATE: JULY 5, 2017 PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER The Petitioner, a technology and service company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a computer programmer under the H-1B nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. ยง 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. The Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the petition. The matter is now before us on appeal. Upon review, we will summarily dismiss the appeal. An officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily dismiss any appeal when the party concerned fails to identify specifically an erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. 8 C.P.R. ยง 103.3(a)(1)(v). The Petitioner did not provide a statement in support of the appeal that specificqlly identifies an erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the decision being appealed. 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 ofthe February 8, 2017, filing date. However, we have not received anything further from the Petitioner to date. Because the Petitioner has not identified a specific, erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the Director's decision below, the appeal must be summarily dismissed. ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.P.R.ยง 103.3(a)(l)(v). Cite as Matter o.fS-S-USA, LLC, ID# 483725 (AAO July 5, 2017)
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.