dismissed H-1B

dismissed H-1B Case: Software Development

📅 Date unknown 👤 Company 📂 Software Development

Decision Summary

The appeal was summarily dismissed on procedural grounds. The petitioner indicated they would submit a brief or additional evidence but failed to do so, and therefore did not identify a specific erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the Director's decision, as required by regulation.

Criteria Discussed

Failure To Identify Erroneous Conclusion Of Law Or Fact

View Full Decision Text

MATTER OF Z-I- INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JUNE 30,2017 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a software development and consulting company, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a computer systems analyst under the H-IB nonimmigrant classification for specialty 
occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). The H-IB 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 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 appealed. 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 February 13, 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 ofZ-1- Inc., ID# 491474 (AAO June 30, 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.