dismissed H-1B

dismissed H-1B Case: Information Technology

๐Ÿ“… Date unknown ๐Ÿ‘ค Company ๐Ÿ“‚ Information Technology

Decision Summary

The appeal was dismissed as abandoned. The AAO sent a letter to the Petitioner to verify their intent to pursue the appeal, as another employer's petition for the same beneficiary had been approved, but the Petitioner did not respond within the given timeframe.

Criteria Discussed

Employer-Employee Relationship Specialty Occupation

Sign up free to download the original PDF

View Full Decision Text
MATTER OF P-T-G~..._____, 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: OCT. 30, 2019 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitione _.._ ________________ ___, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a "technical architect" under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification for specialty 
occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. 
ยง 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 of the California Service Center denied the petition , concluding that the record does not 
establish that (1) the Petitioner will have an employer-employee relationship with the Beneficiary , and 
(2) the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. On appeal , the Petitioner asserts that the 
Director erred in denying the petition. 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services records indicate that a different employer subsequently 
filed an H-lB petition on behalf of the Beneficiary , which has been approved. We sent a letter to the 
Petitioner requesting verification of its intent to pursue this appeal and did not receive a response 
within the allotted timeframe. A benefit request may be denied as abandoned , denied based on the 
record , or denied for both reasons if a petitioner does not respond to a request for evidence or a notice 
of intent to deny by the required date. 8 C.F.R. ยง 103.2(b)(l3)(i) . Therefore , the appeal will be 
dismissed as abandoned because the Petitioner did not respond to our request within the time 
permitted. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed as abandoned pursuant to 8 C.F.R. ยง 103.2(b)(13)(i). 
Cite as Matter of P-T-Gโ–ก ID# 4535336 (AAO Oct. 30, 2019) 
Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

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.