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 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.
Thank you,
Ron Rosenberg
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office www.uscis.gov
Page 2 NON-PRECEDENT DECISION
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center (director) denied the immigrant visa petition and the matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will summarily dismissed as abandoned pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b )(13)(i).
The petitioner describes itself as a business specializing in broadband access, multimedia and wireless technology. It seeks to employ the beneficiary permanently in the United States as a Sales Engineer pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2). As required by statute, the petition is accompanied by an ETA Form 9089, Application for Permanent Employment Certification, approved by the United States Department of Labor (DOL).
The director denied the petition after concluding that the petitioner had failed to establish that the beneficiary possessed the minimum level of education required by the labor certification. The record shows that the appeal is properly filed, timely and makes a specific allegation of error in law or fact. The procedural history in this case is documented by the record and incorporated into the decision. Further elaboration of the procedural history will be made only as necessary. The AAO conducts appellate review on a de novo basis. See Soltane v. DOl, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3d Cir. 2004). The AAO considers all pertinent evidence in the record, including new evidence properly submitted upon appeal. 1
On December 5, 2013, the AAO sent the petitioner a Notice of Intent to Dismiss and Request for Evidence (NOID/RFE), with a copy to counsel of record. In this notice, the AAO informed the petitioner that the record did not contain sufficient evidence to establish that the beneficiary held the Master 's degree in Computer Science required by the labor certification. Accordingly, the petitioner was asked to provide additional evidence concerning the nature of the beneficiary's degree and the date of accreditation for the academic institution that had awarded it. The AAO also requested that the petitioner confirm that the beneficiary had no financial interest in its business and no personal or business relationship with any of its officers. The AAO informed the petitioner that failure to respond would result in the dismissal of the appeal.
As of the date of this decision, the petitioner has not responded to the NOID/RFE. The failure to submit requested evidence that precludes a material line of inquiry shall be grounds for denying the petition. See 8 C.F .R. § 103.2(b)(14). Since the petitioner has failed to respond to the NOID/RFE, the appeal will be summarily dismissed as abandoned pursuant to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b )(13)(i).
Page 3 NON-PRECEDENT DECISION
In visa petition proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter ofOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 (BIA 2013). Here, that burden has not been met.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.