dismissed L-1A Case: Real Estate

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: , EAC 03 171 52758 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: JUN 6 Zo(J5 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 1 101(a)(15)(L) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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 office. 
Robert P. Wiemann, ~irdctor 
Sdministrative Appeals Office 
EAC 03 171 52758 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The nonimmigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont 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 established in 1998 and 
claims to be a real estate company. The petitioner claims to be a subsidiary of Matkal-Camping Vacation 
Herzliya, Ltd., located in Israel. The petitioner seeks to employ the beneficiary temporarily in the United 
States as a manager. The director denied the petition stating that the evidence provided by the petitioner was 
insufficient to establish that the beneficiary had been or would be employed primarily in a managerial or 
executive capacity. 
On appeal, counsel indicated that he would submit a brief or evidence to the MO within 30 days of the 
notice. The notice of appeal is dated July 25, 2003. To date, the MO has not received a brief or any 
additional evidence. Therefore, the record is considered complete. Counsel states that the beneficiary's 
position and duties are managerial in nature. 
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 counsel 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.