dismissed
H-1B
dismissed H-1B Case: Early Childhood Special Education
Decision Summary
The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner failed to specifically identify any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact from the original denial, as required by regulation. The director had initially denied the petition because the proffered position of an early childhood special education teacher in a private household was not found to be a specialty occupation, and the petitioner did not adequately contest this finding on appeal.
Criteria Discussed
Specialty Occupation 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
iadwng data deleted *event dearly anwarranled invasion of prs~nal Q~~v~cY pIJBLlC COPY U.S. Department of Homeland Security 20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 Washington, DC 20529 U.S.Citizenship and Immigration FILE: EAC 04 094 5 1835 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: JAN 132f&@ IN RE: PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(l S)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1 10 l(a)(l S)(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. Robert P. Wiemann, Director Administrative Appeals Office , EAC 04 094 5 1 83 5 Page 2 DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the nonimmigrant visa petition and the matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Ofice (AAO) on appeal. The appeal shall be summarily dismissed. The petitioner is a private household that seeks to employ the beneficiary as an early childhood special education teacher. The petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to 5 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 3 1 10 1 (a)(l S)(H)(i)(b). The director denied the petition because the proffered position is not a specialty occupation. On appeal, the petitioner submits a letter explaining the beneficiary's qualifications. 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. 5 103.3(a)(l)(v). On the Form I-290B, 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 does not present additional evidence on appeal to overcome the decision of the director, the appeal will be summarily dismissed in accordance with 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(l)(v). The burden of proof in this proceeding rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
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.