dismissed
H-1B
dismissed H-1B Case: Medical Research
Decision Summary
The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner failed to identify any specific erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the director's decision. The petitioner's counsel indicated a brief and/or evidence would be submitted, but none was received by the AAO.
Criteria Discussed
Specialty Occupation
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 20 Mass Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 Washington, DC 20529 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration FILE: EAC 04 048 52401 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: SEP 2 1 2005 PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: INSTRUCTIONS: This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. Robert P. Wiemann, Director Administrative Appeals Office EAC 04 048 52401 Page 2 DISCUSSION: The Director of the California Service Center denied the nonimrnigrant visa petition and the matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal shall be dismissed. The petitioner provides health care services and personnel. It seeks to employ the beneficiary as a medical researcher. The director denied the petition on the basis that the proffered position did not meet the definition of a specialty occupation. Counsel submitted a timely Form I-290B on March 17,2004 and indicated that he was submitting a separate brief andlor evidence. As of this date, however, the AAO has not received any additional evidence into the record. Therefore, the record is complete. An officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily dismiss any appeal when the party concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal. 8 C.F.R. Q 103.3(a)(l)(v). On the Form I-290B, counsel fails to specify how the director made any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in denying the petition. As neither the petitioner nor counsel presents additional evidence on appeal to overcome the decision of the director, the appeal will be summarily dismissed in accordance with 8 C.F.R. Q 103.3(a)(l)(v). The burden of proof in ths proceeding rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
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.