dismissed
O-1A
dismissed O-1A Case: Taekwondo
Decision Summary
The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner, on appeal, failed to specifically identify any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact from the director's initial denial. Counsel stated they would submit a brief and evidence but failed to do so for over seven months.
Criteria Discussed
Failure To Identify Specific Error On Appeal Extraordinary Ability Definition
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
U.S. Department of Homclr~nd Security 20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 Washington, DC 20529 FILE: LIN 04 03 1 50229 Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: 1 PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101 (a)(15)(0)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 10 l(a)(15)(0(i) ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Ofice in your case. All documents have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that ofice. 'd @ Robert P. Wiemann, Director Administrative Appeals Office LIN 04 03 1 50229 Page 2 DISCUSSION: The nonimmigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be summarily dismissed. The petitioner is a taekwondo school that seeks to employ the beneficiary as an instructor for a period of three years. The director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary is "one of the small percentage who have arisen to the very top of the field of endeavor" as defined in the: pertinent regulations. On appeal, counsel for the petitioner simply states as the reason for the appeal: "U.S. West Coast Taekwondo submitted sufficient evidence that [the beneficiary] is an 0-1 alien of extraordinary ability as a taekwondo instructor and athlete." Counsel for the petitioner hrther indicated that she would submit a brief andlor additional evidence within thirty days of filing the appeal. More than seven months have lapsed since the appeal was filed and nothing more has been submitted to the AAO. Section 1 Ol(a)(l5)(0)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. tj 1 101(a)(15)(0)(i)17 provides classification to a qualified alien who has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim or, with regard to motion picture and television productions, has a demonstrated record of extraordinary achievement, and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation, and seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of extraordinary ability. The petitioner failed to address specifically the grounds for denial set forth in the decision of the director. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. ยง 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 far 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. ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial
MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.
Avoid This in My Petition →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.