dismissed L-1B Case: Jewelry Design

U.S. Deparlment of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave.. N.W.. Rm. A3042 
Washington. DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: y~y 1 9 m)5 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 3 1 101 (a)(15)(L) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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, ~ihctor 
Administrative Appeals Office 
i 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California 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 is a designer and manufacturer of jewelry. It seeks to employ the beneficiary 
temporarily in the United States as a jewelry designer and setter, pursuant to section lOl(a)(lS)(L) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 9 1101(a)(15)(L). The director denied the petition 
concluding that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary possesses specialized knowledge, or that 
the prospective position requires specialized knowledge. 
On the Form I-290B appeal, counsel simply asserts: "Request if [sic] hereby made that [Citizenship and 
Immigration Service (CIS)] reconsider its decision for this case." Counsel indicates that he is not submitting a 
separate brief or evidence 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. 9 103.3(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. The petitioner has not met this burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed