dismissed O-1B Case: Arts

(b)(6)
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W ., MS 2090 
Washington , DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Date: JUN 2 7 2013 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker under Section 101(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(0)(i) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents 
related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please be advised that 
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 in 
accordance with the instructions on Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $630. The 
specific requirements for filing such a request can be found at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. Do not file any motion 
directly with the AAO. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i) requires that any motion must be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
{x .. . r 
~~.- -- ).·­
·· ,~ ' - ) Ron Rosenberg 
- - ~. 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The nonimmigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, California Service 
Center. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO 
will neither affirm nor overturn the director's decision. Rather, the appeal will be dismissed as moot. 
The petitioner filed this nonimmigrant pet1t10n seeking to classify the beneficiary as an 0-1 
nonimmigrant as an alien with extraordinary ability in the arts, pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(0)(i) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(0)(i). The director determined 
that the petitioner had not established eligibility. 
On appeal, the petitioner asserts that the beneficiary qualifies for the benefit sought under the 
applicable regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2( o )(iv)(A) and (B). 
A review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services records indicates that the beneficiary of this 
petition has adjusted status to that of a permanent resident as of November 27, 2012. While the 
petitioner has not withdrawn the appeal in this proceeding, it would appear that the beneficiary is 
presently a permanent resident and the issues in this proceeding are moot. 
Accordingly, the AAO finds that the beneficiary's adjustment of status deprives this appeal of any 
practical significance. Considerations of prudence warrant the dismissal of the appeal as moot. See 
Matter of Luis, 22 I&N Dec. 747,753 (BIA 1999). 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.