dismissed H-1B Case: Information Technology

(b)(6)
! 
DATE: FEB 2 7 2015 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (Ai\0) 
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 
Immigration 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 
1-2908) 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.F.R. § 103.5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
\ 
berg 
\ /hief, Administrative Appeals Office 
u 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The nonimmigrant visa petition was denied by the service center director and the 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
dismissed as the matter is now moot. 
The petitioner submitted a Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I-129) to the California 
Service Center. In the Form I-129 visa petition, the petitioner describes itself as enterprise engaged 
in information technology (IT)/software consulting development, with thirteen employees, that was 
established in The petitioner sought to classify the beneficiary 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 petition was approved; however, thereafter, the director revoked the approval of the petition on 
notice. On appeal, the petitioner asserts that the director's grounds for revocation were erroneous 
and contends that it satisfied all evidentiary requirements. 
A review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) records indicates that subsequent 
to the revocation of the 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. 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.