dismissed L-1A Case: Sales

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
. - 
A .-GA--,. 4 ' A/- AA.C -L~~G,L';L GC) 
 U. S. Citizenship 
;;veni L lew);i wwananted 
 and Immigration 
invasion f personal privacy 
PUBLIC COPY 
File: SRC 05 075 501 38 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: Om 2 4 2006 
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 10 1 (a)(15)(L) 
IN 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 office. 
- /- &/- 
Robert r' Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
SRC 05 075 50138 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas 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 is a Florida corporation allegedly engaged in the sale of windows and accessories. The 
petitioner seeks to extend the employment of the beneficiary as its president as an L-1A nonimmigrant 
intracompany transferee pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 
U.S.C. 8 1101(a)(15)(L). The director denied the petition concluding that the petitioner failed to establish that 
the new office had been doing business for the previous year as required by 8 C.F.R. 8 214.2(1)(14)(ii)(B). 
The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal. The director ,declined to treat the appeal as a motion and 
forwarded the appeal to the AAO for review. On appeal, the petitioner offers an explanation in a letter dated 
March 21,2005 regarding its business activities during its first year in operation. The petitioner also provides 
additional evidence regarding its business operations. 
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. 8 103.3(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. While the petitioner attempted to provide 
additional information regarding its business activities, it failed to provide any additional evidence for the 
AAO to consider or to identify any errors in this proceeding.1 Consequently, the appeal will be dismissed. 
In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely with the 
petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 1361. The petitioner has not met this burden. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is summarily dismissed. 
'While the petitioner did provide documentation on appeal regarding its business, the petitioner was put on 
notice of required evidence and given a reasonable opportunity to provide it for the record before the visa 
petition was adjudicated. The petitioner failed to submit the requested evidence in response to the director's 
request for evidence and now submits it on appeal. The AAO will not consider this evidence for any purpose. 
See Matter of Soriano, 19 I&N Dec. 764 (BIA 1988); Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533 (BIA 1988).