dismissed H-1B

dismissed H-1B Case: Software Development

๐Ÿ“… Date unknown ๐Ÿ‘ค Company ๐Ÿ“‚ Software Development

Decision Summary

The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner failed to submit a brief or additional evidence after filing the appeal. By not identifying a specific erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the director's decision, the petitioner did not meet the requirements for an appeal.

Criteria Discussed

Failure To Identify Erroneous Conclusion Of Law Or Statement Of Fact

Sign up free to download the original PDF

View Full Decision Text
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF M-S-, LLC 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: FEB. 24,2017 
PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, an information technology and software consulting and development company, seeks 
to employ the Beneficiary as a software programmer. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) 
section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8U.S.C. ยง 110l(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b). The H-18 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, Vermont Service Center, denied the petition. The matter is now before us on appeal. 
Upon review, we will summarily dismiss the appeal. 
An oflicer 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. ยง 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
-
The Petitioner did not include a statement regarding the basis for the appeal upon its filing on 
November 22, 2016. On the Form l-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, the Petitioner stated that a 
brief or additional evidence would be submitted within 30 days of filing. 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. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests with the Petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. ยง 1361. The Petitioner has not satisfied that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. ยง 1 03.3(a)(l)(v). 
Cite as Matter of M-S-. LLC, ID# 339385 (AAO Feb. 24, 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.