dismissed EB-1A Case: Arts

identifying d3ia deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privac~ 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
MAIL STOP 2090 
U. s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PUBLIC COPY 
IN RE: 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to Section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 1153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected as 
untimely filed. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an employment-based immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. $ 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability in 
the arts. The director determined that the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international 
acclaim necessary to qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. More specifically, the director 
found the petitioner had not established that he meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
$ 204.5@)(3). 
In order to properly file an appeal, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ 103,3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party 
must file the complete appeal "with the office where the unfavorable decision was made within 30 days after 
service of the decision." If the decision was mailed, the appeal must be filed within 33 days. See 8 C.F.R. 
$ 103.5a(b). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 1 .l(h) explains that when the last day of a period falls on a Saturday, 
Sunday, or legal holiday, the period shall run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal 
holiday. The date of filing is not the date of mailing, but the date of actual receipt. 
 See 8 C.F.R. § 
103.2(a)(7)(i). 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(a)(l) provides: 
General. Every application, petition, appeal, motion, request, or other document submitted on the 
form prescribed by this chapter shall be executed and filed in accordance with the instructions on the 
form, such instructions (including where an application or petition should be filed) being hereby 
incorporated into the particular section of the regulations in this chapter requiring its submission. 
Part 1 of the instructions for the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal to the AAO, filed by the petitioner states: 
"You must file your appeal with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) office that made the 
unfavorable decision within 30 calendar days after service of the decision (33 days if your decision was 
mailed)." 
The record indicates that the Director, Nebraska Service Center, issued the decision on March 30, 2007. It is 
noted that the director properly gave notice to the petitioner that he had 33 days to file the appeal and that his 
appeal "must be filed with the Nebraska Service Center, P.O. Box 82521, Lincoln, NE 68501-2521." The 
petitioner, however, incorrectly submitted the Form 1-290B to the Vermont Service Center on April 30, 2007. 
The Vermont Service Center then forwarded the Form I-290B to the Nebraska Service Center, which received the 
appeal on May 10, 2007, 41 days after the decision was issued. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
8 103.3(a)(Z)(v)(B)(I) states in pertinent part that "[aln appeal which is not timely filed within the time allowed 
must be rejected as improperly filed." Accordingly, as the appeal was not filed with the Nebraska Service 
Center within the time allowed, it must be rejected. 
Neither the Act nor the pertinent regulations grant the AAO authority to extend the 33-day time limit for 
filing an appeal. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2) states that, if an untimely appeal meets the 
Page 3 
requirements of a motion to reopen or a motion to reconsider, the appeal must be treated as a motion, and a 
decision must be made on the merits of the case. 
A motion to reopen must state the new facts to be proved in the reopened proceeding and be supported by 
affidavits or other documentary evidence. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(2). A motion to reconsider must state the 
reasons for reconsideration and be supported by any pertinent precedent decisions to establish that the 
decision was based on an incorrect application of law or Service policy. A motion to reconsider a decision on 
an application or petition must, when filed, also establish that the decision was incorrect based on the 
evidence of record at the time of the initial decision. 8 C.F.R. 
 103.5(a)(3). A motion that does not meet 
applicable requirements shall be dismissed. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(4). 
Here, the untimely appeal does not meet the requirements of a motion to reopen or a motion to reconsider. 
The petitioner's submission includes no discussion of the new facts to be proved in the reopened proceedmg. 
Nor is there a statement addressing the specific reasons for reconsideration or information indicating the 
director's decision was incorrect based on the evidence of record at the time of the initial decision. Therefore, 
there is no requirement to treat the appeal as a motion under 8 C.F.R. 8 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2). 
As the appeal was untimely filed and does not qualify as a motion, the appeal must be rejected. 
It is noted that even if we were to accept the petitioner's appeal as timely filed, it would be summarily 
dismissed. On appeal, counsel states: "Based on the evidence submitted, it is our contention that there was 
sufficient evidence pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 8 204.5(h)(2) qualifying [the petitioner] as an alien of extraordinary 
ability. We request additional time for submission additional [sic] evidence fiom Poland to strengthen our 
argument." Counsel indicated that a brief andlor evidence would be submitted to the AAO within 90 days. The 
appeal was filed on May 10, 2007. As of this date, more than eighteen months later, the AAO has received 
nothing further. 
The petitioner's appellate submission was unaccompanied by arguments or evidence addressing the pertinent 
regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(h)(3). As stated in 8 C.F.R. 3 103.3(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. The petitioner has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial and 
has not provided any additional evidence. Therefore, were the appeal found to be timely filed, it would be 
summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.