dismissed L-1B Case: Manufacturing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 24303382 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : MAR . 30, 2023 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (L-lB Specialized Knowledge Worker) 
The Petitioner , a manufacturing company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a cutting 
tool production technician under the L-lB nonimmigrant classification for intracompany transferees . 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(L), 8 U.S.C . § 1101(a)(l5)(L) . The 
L-lB classification allows a corporation or other legal entity (including its affiliate or subsidiary) to 
transfer a qualifying foreign employee with "specialized knowledge" to work temporarily in the 
United States. 
The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that: (1) the Beneficiary was qualified to perform the intended services in the United States; 
(2) the Beneficiary has been employed abroad in a position that was managerial, executive, or involved 
specialized knowledge; and (3) the U.S . position involves special knowledge or an advanced level of 
knowledge in the manufacturing field. The matter is now before us on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will summarily dismiss the appeal. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v) states, 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." 
The appeal includes a statement on the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, in which the 
Petitioner briefly describes the Beneficiary's claimed knowledge and experience . The Petitioner also 
notes that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services approved two other petitions that had been 
previously filed on behalf of employees in similar positions, and states that "[t]he evidence submitted 
is very similar in all three cases." The statement, however , includes no substantive response to the 
grounds for denial described in the July 27, 2022 notice of decision. 
Although the Director denied the petition on three specific grounds, the Petitioner does not 
acknowledge or specifically address these grounds, nor does it contest the Director's ultimate decision. 
As the Petitioner does not submit an appeal that identifies specifically any erroneous conclusion of 
law or statement of fact relating to the three grounds for denying the petition, we are summarily 
dismissing the appeal. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed under 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
2