dismissed EB-1A Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
DATE MAR 0 5 2013 OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
INRE : Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizens hip and Immigrat ion Services 
Admini stra tive Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. , MS 2090 
Washin gton, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: 
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. § l153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER : 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS : 
This is the decision of the Admini strative Appeals Office in your case. Please note that all documents have 
been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please also note that any further inquiry must be 
made to that office. 
Thank you, 
~~ 
f-Ron Rosenberg 
Acting Chief , Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
. " 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition, which 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. § 103.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the 
affected party or the attorney or representative of record must submit the complete appeal within 30 
days of service of the unfavorable decision. If the decision was mailed, the appeal must be filed 
within 33 days. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.8(b). The date of filing is not the date of mailing, but the actual 
date of receipt at the designated filing location. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(a)(7)(i). 
The record indicates that the service center director issued the decision on March 7, 2012. It is noted 
that the service center director properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 33 days to file the 
appeal. Neither the Act nor the pertinent regulations grant the AAO authority to extend this time 
limit. 
Although the Form I-290B is dated April 6, 2012, it was not received at the designated filing 
location until April 30, 2012, or 54 days after the decision was issued. 1 Accordingly, the appeal was 
untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(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. The official having jurisdiction over a 
motion is the official who made the last decision in the proceeding, in this case the Director of the 
Texas Service Center. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(ii). The director declined to treat the appeal as a 
motion and forwarded the matter to the AAO. 
As the appeal was untimely filed, the appeal must be rejected. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected. 
1 The record indicates that the petitioner initially attempted to file the appeal on April 11 , 2012, but the appeal 
was rejected and returned to the petitioner because the petitioner either failed to include the filing fee or 
included the incorrect fee. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(a)(7)(i). A benefit request which is rejected will not retain a 
filing date. 8 C.F.R. § I 03.2(a)(7)(iii). Nevertheless, the AAO notes that the petitioner was required to file 
the appeal on or before April 9, 2012, therefore its initial submission was also untimely.