dismissed EB-1A Case: Athletics

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unw 
Invasion f arranteo o personal privacy 
\4IUCCOPl 
FILE: 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. CitiLcnship and Immigration Services 
Qffice (4Administrarive Appeals MS 2090 
\Vashington, DC 20529-2090 
u.s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: 
SEP 1 6 2010 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)( I )(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act; 8 U.s.c. § I IS3(b)( I )(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the 
documents related to this matter have been retumed 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. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. 
The specific requirements for filing such a request can be found at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. All motions must be 
submitted to the office that originally decided your case by filing a Form 1-290B, Notice of Appeal or 
Motion, with a fee of $585. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § I 03.S(a)( I lei) requires that any motion must 
be filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, .. /, 
1 J rY n fllrnCrtL 
i~rw 
19J=hief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
-Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas 
Service Center, on May 15,2009, 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)(I)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.c. § 1153(b)(l)(A), as an 
alien of extraordinary ability in athletics. The director determined that the petitioner had not 
established the requisite extraordinary ability and failed to submit extensive documentation of 
her sustained national or international acclaim. 
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. § l.1(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). 
In addition, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § I 03.2(a)(I) 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. 
The instructions for Form 1-2908, Notice of Appeal or Motion, specifically states: "You must 
file your appeal or motion with the [U .S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 1 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, Texas Service Center, issued the decision on May IS, 
2009. It is noted that the director properly gave notice to the petitioner that she had 33 days to 
file the appeal and that her appeal "must be filed at the address at the top of this page." The 
petitioner, however, incorrectly submitted Form 1-2908 to the Nebraska Service Center on June 18, 
2009. 1 On June 19, 2009, the Nebraska Service Center returned Form 1-2908 with fee to the 
petitioner based on her incorrect filing of the appeal with the Nebraska Service Center. The 
petitioner submitted the appeal to the Texas Service Center on July I, 2009, 47 days after the 
decision was issued. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(8)(I) states in pertinent part that 
1 We note that the petitioner's original submission to the Nebraska Service Center was filed 34 days after the 
decision was issued. 
Page 3 
"[a]n appeal which is not timely filed within the time allowed must be rejected as improperly filed." 
Accordingly, as the appeal was not properly filed 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. As the appeal was untimely filed it must be rejected. 
It is noted that even if the appeal were timely filed, it would be summarily dismissed. On appeal, 
counsel generally states: 
The petitioner is an athlete of extraordinary ability who provided national and 
international documentation to reflect her achievements and the documentation was 
not given consideration in accordance with the requirements. We will submit a brief 
within 30 days. 
Counsel dated the appeal on June 15, 2009. As of this date, approximately 15 months later, the 
AAO has received nothing further. Accordingly, the record is considered complete as it now stands. 
As stated under the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(I)(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 here has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denial 
and has not provided any additional evidence. As the petitioner failed to provide any statement or 
argument regarding the basis of her appeal, it would have been summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.