dismissed L-1A Case: Diamond Industry

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass, Rm. A3042,425 1 Street, N.W. 
Washington, DC 20529 
I 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1101(a)(15)(L) 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originalIy decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
Robert P. Wiernann, dector 
/, Administrative Appeals Oace 
EAC 01 198 52968 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The nonimmigrant visa petition was initially granted by the Director, Vermont Service 
Center. The petitioner received subsequent Notice of Intent to Revoke. The petitioner failed to reply to the 
Notice to Revoke. The director subsequently revoked prior approval of the petition. 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 2000 and 
claims to be a manufacturer, wholesaler, importer, and exporter of diamonds. The petitioner claims to be a 
subsidiary of - located in India. - The petitioner seeks to continue the employ the 
beneficiary in the Unlted States as a manager of assortment and inventory control. The director determined 
that the petitioner was given ample opportunity to submit evidence to overcome the grounds for revocation of 
approval of the petition, but failed to do so. 
On appeal, counsel indicated that he would submit a brief or evidence to the AAO within 30 days of the 
notice. The notice of appeal is dated October 23, 2002. 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 Act, 8 U.S.C. 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.