dismissed H-1B Case: Computer Services

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF V-T-S- LTD. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: APR. 2L 2016 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-129. PETITION FOR NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a computer services company. seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a 
''software engineer'' under the H-1 B nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) § 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(l5)(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, California Service Center, denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
Petitioner did not establish that the: ( 1) Petitioner will have an employer-employee relationship with 
the Beneficiary: and (2) the profTered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. The matter is now 
before us on appeal. We will summarily dismiss the appeal. 
The Petitioner tiled an appeal without a brief or evidence. Although the Petitioner marked Box 1 (b) 
in Part 3 of the Form 1-2908. Notice of Appeal or Motion, indicating that a brief and/or additional 
evidence would be submitted within 30 days. there is no evidence that the record has been 
supplemented with any additional submissions. Accordingly. the record will be considered complete 
as presently constituted. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 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 oflaw or statement of fact for the appeal.'' As noted, the Petitioner did not 
provide a brief or additional evidence in support of the appeal despite indicating on the Form I-290B 
that it intended do so. Moreover, the Petitioner did not provide with its appeal a separate statement 
regarding the basis of the appeal. as instructed at Part 4 of the Form 1-2908. 1 A petitioner filing an 
appeal is required to provide a statement that specifically identifies an erroneous conclusion of law 
or fact in the decision being appealed. Here, the Petitioner has made no reference or objection to the 
1 The Petitioner submits a cover letter, dated December I, 2015, with the Form 1-2908, which states that the Petitioner 
will provide a brief and/or additional evidence within 30 days. However, the Petitioner does not identify any erroneous 
conclusion of law or fact in this letter. 
Matter (~f V- T-S- Ltd 
specific findings set forth in the Director's decision. Therefore, consistent with 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.3(a)(l)(v), the appeal will be summarily dismissed. 2 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
Cite as Matter of V-T-S- Ltd., ID# 17015 (AAO Apr. 21, 20 16) 
2 As the appeal will be summarily dismissed. we will not discuss any additional deficiencies we observe in the record of 
proceeding. 
2