dismissed E-2 Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U. S. Citizenship and Immigrati on Service 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
DATE: OFFICE: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
JUL 0 8 2013 
IN RE: Applicant: 
APPLICATION : 
Beneficiary: 
Application for Extension of Stay as an E-2 Nonimmigrant Treaty Investor 
Pursuant to 8 C.P.R.§ 214.2(e)(20) 
IN BEHALF OF APPLICANT: 
INSTRUCTIONS : 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the 
documents related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please 
be advised that any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office. 
Thank you, 
l~ 
'-/ Ron Rosenberg 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
(b)(6)
Page2 
DISCUSSION: The applicant filed an application for an extension of stay as an E-2 Treaty Investor, 
pursuant to 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(e)(20). In accordance with the regulations, the application for extension of stay 
was filed on Form I-129. See 8 C.P.R.§ 214.l(c)(l). The application was denied by the Director, California 
Service Center. The applicant then filed a motion to reconsider on January 25, 2013. The director dismissed 
the motion. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will 
reject the appeal. 
Pursuant to the regulations at 8 C.P.R.§ 214.l(c)(5) there is no appeal from the denial of an application for an 
extension of status of an E-1 or E-2 treaty trader or treaty investor. The AAO notes that there is no petition 
requirement for E-1 Treaty Traders and there is no petition determination that may be appealed. When it 
published the Final Rule governing the nonimmigrant classification, the Immigration and Naturalization 
Service (former INS, now USCIS) noted: 
[U]nder section 103 of the Act, the service has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate 
applications for admission to this country, as well as applications for change of 
nonimmigrant status to, or extensions of stay in, E nonimmigrant classification. In this 
regard, it should be noted that, unlike other employment-driven classifications, E 
nonimmigrant visa classification is not conferred by means of a petition, but instead by an 
application. 
62 Fed. Reg. 48138 (Sept. 12, 1997). 
Additionally, 8 C.P.R. § l03.5(a)(6) states that the AAO may only consider an appeal from a motion if the 
original decision was appealable before the AAO. Such is not the case in the matter at hand. 
Therefore, although an appeal was subsequently filed, the appeal must be rejected pursuant to the regulation 
at 8 C.P.R. § 214.l(c)(5), which states: 
Decision in Form /-129 or /-539 extension proceedings. Where an applicant or petitioner 
demonstrates eligibility for a requested extension, it may be granted at the discretion of 
the Service. There is no appeal from the denial of an application for extension of stay 
filed on Form /-129 or I-539. 
(Emphasis added.) 
Since this application is for an extension of stay, its denial cannot be appealed and the appeal must be 
rejected. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.