dismissed H-1B Case: Dentistry

(b)(6)
DATE: JAN 2 2 2015 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Office of Administrative Appeals 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
OFFICE: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immi gration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. 
This is a non-precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish agency 
policy through non-precedent decisions. If you believe the AAO incorrectly applied current law or policy to 
your case or if you seek to present new facts for consideration, you may file a motion to reconsider or a 
motion to reopen, respectively. Any motion must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) 
within 33 days of the date of this decision. Please review the Form I-290B instructions at 
http://www.uscis.gov/forms for the latest information on fee, filing location, and other requirements. 
See also 8 C.P.R. § 103.5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Thank you, 
.ALX.� 
�l!tg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the instant nonimmigrant visa petition, and the 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed as the 
matter is now moot. 
In the Form I-129 visa petition, filed July 7, 2014, the petitioner described itself as a "Community 
Health and dental care" firm established in In order to employ the beneficiary in what it 
designates as a "dentist" position, the petitioner seeks to classify her as a nonimmigrant worker in a 
specialty occupation pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 
8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b ). 
The director denied the petition on August 14, 2014 because she determined that the petitioner failed 
to establish that it is exempt from the numerical cap on H-1B visa petitions as it claimed on the visa 
petition. On appeal, counsel reiterated the assertion that the petitioner is exempt from the numerical 
cap. 
A review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) records indicates that on September 
10, 2014, subsequent to the denial of the instant petition, another employer filed a Form I-129 
petition seeking nonimmigrant H-1B classification on behalf of the beneficiary. USCIS records 
further indicate that this other employer's petition was approved on September 16, 2014. Because 
the beneficiary in the instant petition has been approved for H-1B employment with another 
petitioner, further pursuit of the matter at hand is moot. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.