dismissed
EB-1A
dismissed EB-1A Case: Unknown
Decision Summary
The appeal was rejected because it was filed untimely. The appeal was received 34 days after the director's decision was issued, exceeding the 33-day filing period. The AAO also determined that the untimely appeal did not meet the requirements to be treated as a motion to reopen or reconsider.
Criteria Discussed
Not specified
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
PUBLIC COPY U.S. Department of Homeland Security 20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rrn. 3000 Washngton, DC 20529 U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services A LIN 06 251 51581 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. $ 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. w T~obert P. Wiemann, Chief Administrative Appeals 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. In order to properly file an appeal, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party must file the complete appeal within 30 days of after service of the unfavorable decision. If the decision was mailed, the appeal must be filed within 33 days. See 8 C.F.R. 8 103.5a(b). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ l.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. 5 103.2(a)(7)(i). The record indicates that the director issued the decision on October 24, 2007. It is noted that the director properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 33 days to file the appeal. Although counsel dated the appeal November 24, 2007, it was not received by the director until November 27, 2007, 34 days after the decision was issued. Accordingly, the appeal was untimely filed. 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. 5 103,3(a)(Z)(v)(B)(2) states that, if an untimely appeal meets the 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. 4 103.5(a)(4). Here, the untimely appeal does not meet the requirements of a motion to reopen or a motion to reconsider. Therefore, there is no requirement to treat the appeal as a motion under 8 C.F.R. $ 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. ORDER: The appeal is rejected.
Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial
MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.
Avoid This in My Petition →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.