Attorney

The Director denied the petition for not establishing eligibility for a national interest waiver. The initial appeal was summarily dismissed because the Petitioner did not identify specific legal or factual errors and failed to submit a brief/additional evidence within 30 days. The motion to reopen was dismissed because the Petitioner incorrectly mailed the appeal brief to a lockbox instead of directly to the AAO. The motion to reconsider was dismissed as the Petitioner did not establish that the previous decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy.

The motion to reopen and reconsider was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to identify specific erroneous conclusions of law or fact in the initial appeal filing, as required by 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v) and Form I-290B instructions. Additionally, the Petitioner failed to send the follow-on brief directly to the AAO, instead mailing it to a lockbox address, which violated the Form I-290B instructions. The Petitioner did not establish eligibility as of the filing date or demonstrate that the previous decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy.

The Director denied the petition because the record did not establish the petitioner's eligibility for a national interest waiver. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) dismissed the appeal and subsequent motions to reconsider because the petitioner failed to identify any erroneous conclusions of law or fact in the Director's decision and did not contest the correctness of the AAO's prior dismissal decision.

The Administrative Appeals Office dismissed the motions to reopen and reconsider because the Petitioner failed to present new facts supported by evidence, did not elaborate on any change in circumstances, and did not demonstrate that the prior decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy. The Petitioner's appeal remains dismissed, and the underlying petition remains denied due to the failure to establish eligibility for a national interest waiver.