dismissed
H-1B
dismissed H-1B Case: 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
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →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-Gโก ID# 4535336 (AAO Oct. 30, 2019)
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.