official court record strongly contradicts this self-serving statement, The applicant's intransigent attitude concerning his conviction, and his attempt to re-try his case before the interviewing officer would tend to invalidate an assumption of his reformation and rehabilitation.

In view of the type of criminal background relating to the applicant, it is not entirely certain that his admission to the United States would not be contrary to the national welfare, safety, and security of the nation. With regard to the hardship alleged by the applicant's son, it cannot be regarded as within the purview of the "extreme hardship contemplated by the statute. The applicant resides adjacent to a son who has never actually been seperated from him.

In view of the absence of persuasive, appealing factors and the presence of many that are derogatory, the application will be denied as a matter of discretion.

ORDER: It is ordered that the application of Domenico Vaccarello for a waiver of excludability under paragraphs (9) and (10) of section 212(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, be and is denied, pursuant to the authority contained under section 212(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

First preference quota status under section 203 (a) (1), Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, as a dentist, is accorded the beneficiary of a petition filed by an organization-the Village of DeWitt, Michigan, 'which,'' acting on behalf of the community, desires, and has established an urgent need for, the services of the beneficiary-even though beneficiary will not be in the actual employ of the petitioner.

The petitioner, the Village of DeWitt, Michigan, seeks to bring a dentist to DeWitt as a private practitioner to provide dental services for the people in the community and the surrounding area. The population of DeWitt is 1,300 and 7,000 persons live in the surrounding area.

The petitioner requires a dentist with the degree of doctor of dental surgery. The nearest dentists are in Lansing, Michigan, eight miles away. Appointments must often be scheduled two to four months in advance. The Bureau of Employment Security has found that the occupation is one for which nationally the supply of available workers is inadequate to meet all demands.

The beneficiary is an unmarried, 32-year-old British subject, who was born in Hong Kong. He was admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant. Evidence has been presented that he received the degree of doctor of dental surgery from the University of Detroit, Detroit, Michigan, in June 1963. He is employed as a dentist at Wayne County General Hospital, Eloise, Michigan,

Under section 203 (a) (1) (A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, first preference quota status may be accorded to "qualified quota immigrants whose services are determined by the Attorney General to be needed urgently in the United States because of the high education, technical training, specialized experience, or exceptional ability of such immigrants and to be substantially beneficial

སྐད།་ལྷུམས་༈་ཉི

prospectively to the national economy, cultural interests, or welfare of the United States".

Those who may file a visa petition under section 204 (b) of the Act to have an alien classified as a first preference quota immigrant are "any person, institution, firm, organization, or governmental agency desiring to have an alien classified as an immigrant under *** section 203 (a) (1) (A)”.

While the Village of DeWitt will not be the beneficiary's actual employer, it is an organization which, acting on behalf of the community, desires the services of the beneficiary and has established an urgent need for his services. T

1

The beneficiary has the required high education and his services would be substantially beneficial prospectively to the welfare of the United States.

Since the requirements of the statute have been met, the petition will be approved.

(1

ORDER: It is ordered that the petition be approved.

Since the burden of proof of establishing eligibility for nonquota status rests. upon the petitioner, and since the petitioner has not borne his burden-his identity and claimed relationship to the beneficiaries having been cast in I doubt by the established identity of his mother and by the testimony of witnesses in Hong Kong-the visa petition approval is révoked, without prej-¡ udice to reopening if petitioner is able to produce further evidence relating to his claimed identity and relationship.

The cases come forward on appeal from the notice of revocation of the District Director, San Francisco District, dated October 29, 1963, revoking the visa petitions in behalf of the son and daughter for the reasons that the American Consulate at Hong Kong has returned the visa petitions with the information that a local investigation concerning the beneficiaries reveals that they are surnamed LOUIE rather than YEE and, therefore, the petitioner failed to establish the relationship claimed; and that the petitioner has also failed to resolve discrepancies developed by the American Consulate in Hong Kong.

The petitioner, born at Wo On Village, Toyshan District, Kwangtung, China on February 9, 1924, claims United States citizenship through parentage and is holder of a certificate of citizenship AA33814 issued in San Francisco in 1952. He filed a visa petition on September 7, 1962, on behalf of his alleged son, Jerng Wai Yee, and daughter, Chun Har Yee. The beneficiaries were born on December 6, 1951, and April 1, 1949, respectively, at Wo On Li, Toyshan District, Kwangtung, China. The petitions were conditionally approved for nonquota status on October 8, 1962, and forwarded to the American Consulate at Hong Kong.

245-235-67

The visa petitions were accompanied by a letter dated April 17, 1958, relating to the approved visa petition of the petitioner's wife, Ng Ngan Sun, which reflected that the petitioner first arrived in the United States on June 15, 1952, was admitted by a Board of Special Inquiry as a United States citizen and was issued citizenship certificate No. AA-33814 around August 14, 1952. At the time of his first admission to the United States he was 26 years old and stated he was single. When he applied for a certificate of citizenship he also stated that he was single. The petitioner alleged that he made a trip to Hong Kong on April 29, 1957, returning on October 2, 1957, and exhibited United States Passport No. 197665 showing such admission. The petitioner was interviewed on April 15, 1958, and the facts and allegations in his petition and relating files were verified by him. He furnished photographs of himself and the wife-beneficiary of his petition, identifying the latter photograph as a good likeness of his wife, Ng Ngan Sun. He also submitted a certified copy of a Hong Kong marriage certificate certifying to the marriage of himself to the beneficiary. In the interview he stated that he was married on August 31, 1957, and that he first met his wife in the Nathan Coffee Shop in Kowloon after being introduced to her by a friend, Ng Min Poy. He stated that after two months they became engaged and then in about another month they were married; that he then lived with his wife after the marriage. He stated that he thereafter took his wife to the movies; that he bought her a gold ring with a jade setting; and also bought her some clothes including shoes and a wrist watch of Swiss make. He stated that his wife's father is Ng Man Yin and her mother is Lew Shee, both of whom were presently in Hong Kong and that his wife has no brothers or sisters. The petitioner stated that his wife's native village was Tung Gong Village T.S.D., China and that she had lived in Hong Kong for over two years. He stated that he sent her a little less than $1,000 since he returned to the United States and stated that she is not now pregnant. Photographs of the petitioner and the beneficiary and the certificate of marriage certifying to the marriage of Yee Yook Lin and Ng Ngan Sun were presented.

The petitioner was interviewed on October 8, 1962. It was ascertained that the original information regarding his single status was false. Actually, according to the petitioner, he was married by Chinese custom at the Wo On Village, Toishan, China, on December 15, 1945, and remarried, according to western custom at Hong Kong on August 31, 1957. The petitioner's wife was also present at the interview and her file, A-10768805 shows she was admitted into the