dismissed EB-1A Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
DATE JUL 1 9 2013 Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary : 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service~ 
Administr ative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washin gton, DC 20529-20 90 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to Section 
203(b )(1 )(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U .S.C. § 1153(b )(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF -REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS : 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. 
Thank yo~ 
~( /f-<r== 
Ron Rosenberg 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska 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.P.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.P.R. § 103.8(b). In this matter, however, the director sent the decision by 
facsimile. The date of filing is not the date of submission, but the date of actual receipt with the 
required fee. See 8 C.P.R. § 103.2(a)(7)(i). 
The record indicates that the service center director issued the decision on December 26, 2012. It is 
noted that the service center director properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 30 days to file 
the appeal, as the denial was sent via facsimile. Neither the Act nor the pertinent regulations grant 
the AAO authority to extend this time limit. 
Because the director sent the decision by facsimile, the appeal was due no later than January 25, 
2013, but was not properly filed with the proper fee until February 6, 2013. Accordingly, the appeal 
was untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.P.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 
Nebraska Service Center. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(ii). The director determined that the late 
appeal did not meet the requirements of 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.