dismissed H-1B Case: Information Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF D-G- INC. 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: NOV. 16, 2016 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, an information technology solutions company, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a "system administrator" under the H -1 B nonimmigrant classification for specialty 
occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). The H-lB 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, Vermont Service Center, denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
Petitioner did not establish that sufficient specialty occupation work, was available for the 
Beneficiary in accordance with the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. · 
The matter is now before us on appeal. We will summarily dismiss the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWOR,K 
A petition may be summarily denied as abandoned, denied based on the record, or denied for both 
reasons if a petitioner does not respond to a notice by the required date. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l3)(i). 
The failure to submit requested evidence that precludes a material line of inquiry shall be grounds 
for denying the petition. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(14). 
II. DISCUSSION 
On September 29, 2016, we issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss and Request for Evidence. We 
asked the Petitioner to verify its intent to pursue the appeal, and requested additional evidence to 
address potel)tially derogatory information we noted in our initial review of the record. The 
Petitioner did not respond to our request. Therefore, we are summarily dismissing the appeal as 
abandoned. The remaining issues in this proceeding are thereby moot. 
Matter of D-G- Inc. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The burden is on the Petitioner to show eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter ofOtiende, 26 I&N Dt;c. 127, 128 (BIA 2013). Here, that burden 
has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed as abandoned pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(13). 
Cite as Matter of D-G- Inc., ID# 11898 (AAO Nov. 16, 20 16) 
2