dismissed L-1A Case: Chemical Business

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Avr., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: SRC 03 164 5 18 17 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section I0 l(a)(15)(1.) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. tj 1 10 1 (a)(l S)(L) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further irlquiry must be made to that office. 
2a-i-9 IRO n . Wiemann, Director 
0 
dministrative Appeals Office 
SRC 03 164 51817 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The nonimmigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service Center. The 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be summarily 
dismissed. 
According to the documentary evidence contained in the record, the petitioner was incorporated in 2001 and 
claims to be a chemical business. The petitioner claims to be a branch office of OHEC Chemicals PVT LTD, 
located in Admedabad, India. The petitioner seeks to extend its authorization to employ the beneficiary 
temporarily in the United States as its president. The director determined that the evidence was insufficient to 
establish that the beneficiary was employed in a primarily managerial or executive capacity and that the U.S. 
entity was generating sufficient revenue within one year of approval of the initial petition to support a 
managerial or executive position. 
On appeal, counsel indicated that he would submit a brief or evidence to the AAO within 30 days. The notice 
of appeal is dated December 16, 2003. In addition, on January 14, 2004, the AAO granted counsel's request 
for an additional 45-day extension in which to file his brief. Counsel was granted an extension to on or before 
March 5, 2004. To date, the AAO has not received any additional evidence. Therefore, the record is 
considered complete. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 103.3(a)(l)(v) states in part: 
Summary dismissal. An officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily dismiss any 
appeal when the party concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law 
or statement of fact for the appeal. 
As the petitioner has failed to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the 
appeal, the appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought rests solely with the 
petitioner. Section 291 of the ,4ct, 8 U.S.C. 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.