dismissed O-1B Case: Photography

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave. NW, Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: WAC 04 032 53 100 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: D[c 2 2 2005 
n\~ RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETTTTON: Petitioii for a Nonimmigranlt Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Immigration - - - - - - - 
and Natiollality Act, 8 U:S.C. 5 I 101 (a)(l5)(O)(i) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office ill your case. All documents have been rehlriled to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
,JV Robert P. Wiemann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 04 032 53 100 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The California Service Center Director denied the nonimmigrant visa petition and the matter is 
now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner is a publisher that "specializes in art and intellectual history." It seeks 0-1 classification of the 
beneficiary, under section 101(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 
1 101(a)(15)(O)(i), as an alien with extraordinary ability in the arts. The petitioner seeks to employ the beneficiary 
temporarily ill the United States for a period of two years as a professional photography consultant. 
The director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner had failed to establish that the beneficiary has 
sustained recognition as being one of a small percentage at the very top of his field of endeavor. 
Counsel for the petitioner timely filed a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal to the Administrative Appeals Unit, in 
which he stated that the petitioner does not agree with the director's decision. Counsel indicated on the Form I- 
290B that a brief andlor additional evidence would be submitted within 30 days. As of the date of this decision, 
however, more than 14 months after the appeal was filed, no further documentation has been received by the 
AAO. Therefore, the record will be considered complete as presently constituted. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 103.3(a)(l)(v) states, in pertinent part: 
An officer to wliom an appeal is taken sl~all 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 petitioner has failed to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of fact in this 
proceeding; therefore, the appeal must be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.