dismissed L-1A Case: Travel

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W., Rm. ~3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: EAC 02 237 52417 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: 1 1 '?m$ 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(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, ~irecJor 
Administrative Appeals Office 
"$a 
EAC 02 237 52417 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the petition for a nonirnmigrant visa. The 
petitioner subsequently filed a motion to reconsider. The director granted the motion and affirmed his 
decision to deny the petition. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. 
The appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
The petitioner states that it is engaged in the travel industry. 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. $ 1101(a)(15)(L). The director denied the petition 
concluding that the petitioner had not established that the beneficiary has been or will be employed in a 
managerial or executive capacity. 
On the Form 1-290B appeal submitted on February 9, 2004, counsel simply asserts: "We will be submitting 
additional documentations [sic], which will prove that the beneficiary will be employed in a professional or 
managerial Capacity." Although counsel indicates that a brief andlor evidence would be submitted within 30 
days, counsel did not indicate why the brief would be submitted late or otherwise provide good cause for the 
requested extension. As of this date, the record does not contain a supplemental appellate brief. Regardless, 
pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(vii), counsel's request for additional time to submit a brief is denied as a 
matter of discretion for failure to show good cause, and the record will be considered complete. 
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 counsel 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 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1361. Here, the petitioner has not met this burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.