dismissed H-1B

dismissed H-1B Case: Information Technology

📅 Date unknown 👤 Company 📂 Information Technology

Decision Summary

The appeal was summarily dismissed on procedural grounds. The petitioner failed to identify a specific erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the original decision, as required, and did not submit a promised brief or additional evidence to support the appeal.

Criteria Discussed

Failure To Identify Erroneous Conclusion Of Law Or Fact

View Full Decision Text

MATTER OF J-S-, INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JUNE 21,2017 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, an information technology consulting and development company, seeks to temporarily 
employ the Beneficiary as an "IT analyst" under the H-1B nonimmigrant classification for specialty 
occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act section lOI(a)(IS)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 110l(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). The H-1B 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. 
I 
The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition. The matter is now before us on 
appeal. Upon review, we will summarily dismiss the appeal. 
An officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily dismiss any appeal when the party concerned 
fails to identify specifically an erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. 
8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
The Petitioner did not provide a statement in support of the appeal that specifically identifies an 
erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the decision being appe~led. On the Form I-290B, Notice of 
Appeal or Motion, the Petitioner stated that a brief or additional evidence would be submitted within 
30 days of the January 20, 2017, filing date. However, we have not received anything further from 
the Petitioner to date. Because the Petitioner has not identified a specific, erroneous conclusion of 
law or statement of fact in the Director's decision below, the appeal must be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
Cite as Matter of J-S-, Inc., ID# 436635 (AAO June 21, 2017)

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.