dismissed H-1B Case: Software Development

(b)(6)
DATE: 
IN RE: 
PETITION: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Office of Administrative Appeals 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
JAN 2 g 2uiS OFFICE: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. 
This is a non-precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish agency 
policy through non-precedent decisions. If you believe the AAO incorrectly applied current law or policy to 
your case or if you seek to present new facts for consideration, you may file a motion to reconsider or a 
motion to reopen, respectively. Any motion must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) 
within 33 days of the date of this decision. Please review the Form I-290B instructions at 
http://www.uscis.gov/forms for the latest information on fee, filing location, and other requirements. 
See also 8 C.P.R. § 103.5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Ron Rosenberg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the instant nonimmigrant visa petition, and the 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed as the 
matter is now moot. 
In the Form I-129 visa petition, filed May 21, 2012, the petitioner described itself as a "Software 
Services & Development" firm with 16 employees established in In order to employ the 
beneficiary in what it designates as a "Software Developer" position, the petitioner seeks to classify 
him as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). 
The director initially approved the visa petition on June 15, 2012. The director subsequently issued 
a notice of intent to revoke and ultimately did revoke approval of the visa petition on March 17, 
2014 because she determined that the petitioner failed to establish "that the duties of the proffered 
position require a specialty occupation and that it has sufficient work for the requested period of 
employment." 
On appeal, counsel contended that the director's decision to revoke approval of the visa petition does 
not accord with the evidence of record and, therefore, should be overturned. 
A review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) records indicates that on April 25, 
2014, subsequent to the revocation of approval of the instant petition, another employer filed a Form 
I-129 petition seeking nonimmigrant H-1B classification on behalf of the beneficiary. USCIS 
records further indicate that this other employer's petition was approved on October 2, 2014. 
Because the beneficiary in the instant petition has been approved for H-1B employment with another 
petitioner, further pursuit of the matter at hand is moot. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.