dismissed
EB-1A
dismissed EB-1A Case: Unknown
Decision Summary
The appeal was rejected as untimely filed. The director's decision was issued on January 5, 2011, and sent via facsimile, giving the petitioner 30 days to appeal. The appeal was not received until February 7, 2011, 33 days later, and was therefore rejected.
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
ident?fyingdatadeletedto preventclearïyumvarranted ïnvasionofpersonalprivacy PUBLICCOPY U.S.DepartmentofHomelandSecurity U.S.CitizenshipandImrnigrationServices AdministrativeAppealsOffice (AAO) 20 MassachusettsAve.,N.W., MS 2090 Washington,DC 20529-2090 U.S.Citizenship and Immigration Services DATE Office: TEXAS SERVICECENTER FILE: IN RE: Petitioner: Beneficiary: PETITION: ImmigrantPetitionfor Alien WorkerasanAlien of ExtraordinaryAbility Pursuantto Section 203(b)(1)(A)of theImmigrationandNationalityAct, 8U.S.C.§ 1153(b)(1)(A) ON BEHALF OFPETITIONER: INSTRUCTIONS: This is thedecisionof theAdministrativeAppealsOffice in your case. Pleasenotethat all documentshave beenreturnedto the office that originally decidedyour case. Pleasealsonotethat anyfurther inquiry mustbe madeto that office. Thankyou, PerryRhew Chief,AdministrativeAppealsOffice www.uscis.gov Page2 DISCUSSION: TheDirector,TexasServiceCenter,deniedtheemployment-basedimmigrantvisa petition,which is now beforetheAdministrativeAppealsOffice (AAO) on appeal.Theappealwill berejectedasuntimelyfiled. In order to properly file an appeal,the regulationat 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(i)providesthat the affectedparty or theattorneyor representativeof recordmustsubmitthecompleteappealwithin 30 daysof serviceof the unfavorabledecision. If the decisionwasmailed,the appealmustbe filed within 33 days. See8 C.F.R.§ 103.8(b). Thedateof filing is not thedateof submission,but the dateof actualreceiptwith therequiredfee. See8 C.F.R.§ 103.2(a)(7)(i). The recordindicatesthat the servicecenterdirectorissuedthe decisionon January5, 2011. It is notedthattheservicecenterdirectorproperlygavenoticeto thepetitionerthatit had30 daysto file theappeal,asthedenialwassentvia facsimile. NeithertheAct nor thepertinentregulationsgrant theAAO authoritytoextendthistimelimit. AlthoughcounseldatedtheFormI-290BFebruary3, 2011,it wasnotreceivedby theservicecenter until February7, 2011, or 33 daysafter the decisionwas issued. Accordingly, the appealwas untimelyfiled. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2) states that, if an untimely appeal meets the requirementsof amotion to reopenor amotion to reconsider,theappealmustbetreatedasamotion, and a decisionmust be madeon the merits of the case. The official havingjurisdiction over a motionis theofficial who madethelastdecisionin theproceeding,in this casetheDirectorof the TexasServiceCenter. See8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(1)(ii). The director determinedthat the late appeal did not meettherequirementsof amotion andforwardedthematterto theAAO. As theappealwasuntimelyfiled, theappealmustberejected. ORDER: Theappealis 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.