dismissed O-1A Case: Jiu-Jitsu

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal prtvacy 
\'{JBLlC COpy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Cill/l'llShlp alld [mmi~rati()11 Scr\"IC(.'~ 
Adrninistratlve Appeals Olliee (,\;\01 
20 MassJchll:..clh Ave .. N,\V .. MS 2()'-)(j 
Washington. DC 20S2IJ·2()l)O 
u.s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: MAR 0 8 2011 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker under Section 101 (a)( 15)(O)(i) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C § I IOI(a)(15)(O)(i) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the document> 
related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Plcase be advised Ihat 
any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. The 
specific requirements for filing such a request can be found at 8 C.F.R. ~ 103.5. All motions must be 
submitted 10 the olTice that originally decided your case by filing a Form 1-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion. 
with a fee of $630. Please be aware that 8 CF.R. § I 03.5(a)( I lei) requires thai any mol ion musl be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
Perry Rhew 
Chief. Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California Service Center, denied the nonimmigrant visa petition. The matter is 
now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appea\. The AAO will summarily dismiss the appea\. 
The petitioner filed the nonimmigrant visa petition seeking classification of the bcneficiary under section 
101(a)(l5)(0)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.s.c. § 1101(a)(15)(0)(i), as an alien with 
extraordinary ability in athletics. The petitioner, a jiu-jitsu school, seeks to employ the beneficiary as a jill-jitsll 
instructor for a period of three years. 
The director denied the petition on June 23, 2010, concluding that the petitioner failcd to cstablish that the 
beneficiary has achieved sustained national or intemational acclaim as a liu-jitsu coach or instructor or that he is 
among the small percentage at the very top of his field. The director determined that the evidence submitted did 
not meet the applicable evidentiary criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(0)(3 )(iii)(A) or (8). 
The petitioner subsequently filed an appea\. The director declined to treat the appeal as a motion and forwarded 
the appeal to the AAO for review. On the Form 1-2908, Notice of Appeal or Motion, counsel for the petitioncr 
asselts: "A brief in SUppOlt of the appeal will be submitted to the Administrative Appeals Office within 30 days." 
Counsel filed the Form 1-2908 on July 23, 2010 and has not yet submitted a brief or additional evidence III 
SUppOlt of the appea\. Accordingly, the record will be considered complete. 
Regulations at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(I)(v) state, in pertinent part: 
An officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily dismiss any appcal when the party 
concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of 
fact for the appea\. 
The petitioner fails to specify how the director made any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in 
denying the pctition. As the petitioner does not present additional evidence on appeal to overcomc the dccision of 
the director. or otherwise state a basis for the appeal, the appeal will be summarily dismissed in accordancc with 
8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)( I lev). 
The denial of this petition is without prejudice to the filing of a new petition by the petitioner accompanicd by thc 
appropriate suppolting evidence and fee. 
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. Inasmuch as the petitioner has failed to identify 
specifically an erroneolls conclusion of law or a statement of fact in support of the appeal, the petitioner has 
not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.