dismissed EB-1A Case: Unknown

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: 2 2~ 
SRC 05 169 51948 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinaiy Ability Pursuant to Section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 153(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. 
2obert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Ofice (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. 5 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
The director determined the petitioner had not established that he qualifies for classification as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. 
In order to properly file an appeal, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. Ej 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. 5 103.5a(b). 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 record indicates that the director issued the decision on December 12,2005. The appeal was received by 
Citizenship and Immigration Services on January 20, 2006, or 39 days after the decision was issued. 
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 oRcial who made the 
last decision in the proceeding, in this case the service center director. See 8 C.F.R. $ 103.5(a)(l)(ii). The 
director declined to treat the late 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.