DA1;J;,;R OFFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER
~ 072014
INRE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Citizenship and lmmigrati6n Service
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO)
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090
Washington, DC 20529-2090
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services
FILE:
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b )(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2) ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER:
INSTRUCTIONS:
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. This is a non-precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish agency policy through non-precedent decisions. If you believe the AAO incorrectly applied current law or policy to your case or if you seek to present new facts for consideration, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen, respectively. Any motion must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) within 33 days of the date of this decision. Please review the Form I-290B instructions at http://www.uscis.gov/forms for the latest information on fee, filing location, and other requirements. See also 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO.
ThW·. k.· yo·?/l .. -~. . . ' ····, .... ~ .· . . '. wr· -.·:·A·,. ._ ' Ron Rosenberg
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition and the matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be summarily dismissed.
The petitioner seeks to classify the beneficiary pursuant to section 203(b )(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2), which provides for an immigrant classification to members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent and whose services are sought by an employer in the United States. The director determined that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary met the minimal education requirements on the approved labor certification as of the priority date.
On appeal, counsel stated that the director erred in denying the petition and that the beneficiary possesses the education required for the position. Counsel indicated that a brief would be submitted within 30 days.
Counsel dated the appeal August 20, 2013. As of this date, more than seven monthslater, the AAO has received nothing further, and the regulation requires that any brief shall be submitted directly to the AAO. 8 C.F.R. §§ 103.3(a)(2)(vii) and (viii).
As stated in 8 C.P.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v), an appeal shall be summarily dismissed if the party concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the appeal.
Counsel here has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial and has not provided any additional evidence. The appeal must therefore be summarily dismissed.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.