dismissed H-1B Case: Supply Chain Analysis

MATTER OF X-P-N-A-, INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: OCT. 24,2016 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a metal plating business, seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a "supply chain analyst" 
under the H-IB nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See Immigration and Nationality 
Act (the Act) section 101(a)(l5)(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, California Service Center, denied the petition, concluding that the evidence of record 
did not satisfy the regulatory requirements for an H-1B specialty occupation. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. We will summarily dismiss the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
An officer will summarily dismiss an appeal when the Petitioner does not identify specifically any 
erroneous conclusion oflaw or statement of fact for the appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
II. DISCUSSION 
The Petitioner marked Box 1 (a) in Part 3 of the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, to 
indicate that it would submit a brief and/or additional evidence to our office within 30 days of filing 
the appeal. The appeal was filed on September 12, 2016, but to date we have received neither a brief 
nor additional evidence. Moreover, the Petitioner did not provide a separate statement regarding the 
basis ofthe appeal, as instructed at Part 4 of the Form I-290B. Accordingly, the record is considered 
complete. 
' 
Upon review of the appeal, we conclude that the Petitioner has not specifically identified any 
erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact as a basis for the appeal. Further, the Petitioner has 
made no reference or objection to the specific findings set forth in the Director's decision. 
Matter of X-P-N-A-, Inc. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The burden is on the Petitioner to show eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter ofOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 (BIA 2013). Inasmuch as the 
Petitioner has not specifically identified an erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of fact in this 
proceeding, the Petitioner has not met that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
Cite as Matter of X-P-N-A-, Inc., ID# 183699 (AAO Oct. 24, 2016) 
2