dismissed H-1B Case: Systems Analysis

(b)(6)
MATTER OF B-S-, INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: FEB. l7, 2016 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, 
PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a development and consulting firm, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a 
"systems/programmer analyst" under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification. See Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act) § 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b). The Director, 
California Service Center, denied the petition. The Petitioner filed a combined motion to reopen and 
motion to reconsider. The Director granted the motion, but affirmed the decision to deny the petition. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. We will dismiss the appeal as the matter is now moot. 
I. BACKGROUND 
The Petitioner claims to be organized under the law of the State of Maryland. During a preliminary 
review of the record, we were unable to determine that the Petitioner is a business in good standing 
in Maryland. We sent a request for evidence (RFE) to the Petitioner. The Petitioner responded; 
however, it did not provide documentary evidence to demonstrate that it is a business in good 
standing and authorized to conduct business in Maryland. 1 The Petitioner claimed that its corporate 
charter status has been reinstated but that it would not be updated in the public database until 
2016. 
II. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
A petitioner must establish that it is eligible for the benefit request at the time of filing and must 
continue to be eligible through adjudication . 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b). The failure to submit requested 
evidence that precludes a material line of inquiry is grounds for denying the benefit request. 8 
C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(14). The regulations state that additional time to respond to a request for evidence 
may not be granted. 8 C.F.R. § 
103.2(b)(8)(iv). The approval of any H-lB petition is "immediately 
and automatically revoked ifthe petitioner goes out ofbusiness." 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(ll)(B)(ii). 
1 The Petitioner submitted a letter from the State of Maryland, Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation . 
However, the letter does not indicate that the Petitioner is an entity in good standing . 
Matter of B-S-, Inc. 
III. ANALYSIS 
The issue of whether the Petitioner is a business in good standing is material to its eligibility for the 
requested benefit. An H-1B petition may be approved only for the period of intended employment 
for which the petitioning entity would be doing business as described in the petition. If a petitioner 
is not actually in business, it cannot qualify as an entity with standing to file an H-1B petition. 
Moreover, a beneficiary is authorized to work in an H-1B position only for the employer that filed 
the H-1B petition. See generally 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(l)(i) and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(2)(i)(A)- (D). 
Here, the Petitioner's RFE response did not demonstrate that it is authorized to conduct business in 
Maryland. Moreover, the Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation Business Services 
website continues to indicate that the Petitioner's status has been "forfeited." See the Maryland 
Department of Assessments and Taxation Business Services on the Internet at 
http://sdatcert3.resiusa.org/ucc-charter/Pages/CharterSearchldefault.aspx (last visited Feb. 17, 2016). 
According to the website, the term "forfeited" means that the entities existence has been ended by 
the State for a delinquency. 
IV. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not demonstrated that it is an entity in good standing, further pursuit of the 
matter at hand is moot. 2 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter ofB-S-, Inc., ID# 15323 (AAO Feb. 17, 2016) 
2 We will briefly note that even if the matter was not moot, the petition could not be approved as the record does not 
demonstrate (1) that the proffered position is a specialty occupation; and (2) that the labor condition application 
corresponds to the petition. 
2