dismissed H-1B Case: Software Development

(b)(6)
DATE: FEB 2 7 2015 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service: 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W . . MS 2090 
Washington. DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
OFFICE: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10l(a)(l5)(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 
l-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:·F·�:--§--1{)-�. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Thfi , 7) ) 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The nonimmigrant visa petition was denied by the service center director and the 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
dismissed as the matter is now moot. 
The petitioner submitted a Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I-129) to the California 
Service Center. In the Form I-129 visa petition, the petitioner describes itself as enterprise engaged 
in software development that was established in The petitioner seeks to classify the 
beneficiary 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 denied the petition, finding that the petitioner did not establish (1) that the proffered 
position qualifies as a specialty occupation and that it has sufficient work for the requested period of 
intended employment, and (2) that it would have an employer-employee relationship with the 
beneficiary in accordance with the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. On appeal, the 
petitioner asserts that the director's grounds for denial were erroneous and contends that it satisfied 
all evidentiary requirements. 
A review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) records indicates that subsequent 
to the submission of the appeal, another employer filed a Form I-129 petition seeking nonimmigrant 
H -1 B classification on behalf of the beneficiary. USC IS records further indicate that this other 
employer's petition was approved. Because the beneficiary in the instant petition has been approved 
for H-lB employment with another petitioner, further pursuit of the matter at hand is moot. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.