dismissed L-1A Case: Import/Export

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N. W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: EAC-03-221-54975 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: JUW 0 6 2005 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 101(a)(15)(L) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
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 inquiry must be made to that ofice. 
L' $obert P. Wiemann, Director 
qministrative Appeals Ofice 
C 
EAC-03-221-54975 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the petition for a nonimmigrant visa. The 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be summarily 
dismissed. 
The petitioner states that it operates as an importer and exporter. It seeks to extend its authorization to 
employ the beneficiary temporarily in the United States as its president, pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(L) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. tj 1101(a)(I 5)(L). The director denied the petition 
based on the conclusion that the petitioner failed to establish the following factors: (I) that the petitioner has 
a qualifying relationship with the claimed foreign entity; and (2) that the beneficiary has been and will 
continue to be employed in a managerial or executive capacity. 
On the Form I-290B appeal, the petitioner references an attached letter. In the one-page letter, the petitioner 
states "[pllease find the attachment of Form I-290B and following information as you requested." The 
petitioner then lists 13 items of documentation submitted in support of the appeal. The petitioner does not 
discuss the director's analysis or grounds for denial, or identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law 
or statement of fact for the appeal. 
To establish eligibility under section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Act, the petitioner must meet certain criteria. 
Specifically, within three years preceding the beneficiary's application for admission into the United States, a 
firm, corporation, or other legal entity, or an affiliate or subsidiary thereof, must have employed the 
beneficiary for one continuous year. Furthermore, the beneficiary must seek to enter the United States 
temporarily to continue rendering his or her services to the same employer or a subsidiary or affiliate thereof 
in a managerial, executive, or specialized knowledge capacity. 
Upon review, the AAO concurs with the director's decision and affirms the denial of the petition. 
Regulations at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(l)(v) state, in pertinent part: 
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. 
Inasmuch as the petitioner has failed to identify specifically an erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of 
fact in this proceeding, the appeal must be summarily dismissed. 
In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely with the 
petitioner. Section 29 1 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 9 136 1. The petitioner has not met this burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.