dismissed EB-1A Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
U.S. Department of llomcland St~curity 
u:s. Citizenship and Immigration Service 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusens Ave .. N.\'1/., MS 1090 
Washinclon . DC 20:'\29- ~090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Servi<;:es 
DATE: JAN 0 7 2013 Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: · 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)( I )(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)( I )(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER : 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative 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, 
)WeJJlilc!u 
["\Ron Rosenberg 
\'Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
• 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, 
Nebraska Service Center, and is now before the AdiT).inistrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. 
The appeal will be rejected. 
In order to properly file an appeal, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 1 03.3(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 regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 1.2 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 submission, but the date of actual receipt with the proper signature and the 
required fee. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(a)(7)(i). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(J) 
provides that an appeal which is not filed within the time allowed must be rejected as improperly 
filed. · 
j The record indicates that the service center director issued the decision on June 28, 2012. It is 
noted that the service center director properly gave notice to the petitioner that he had 33 days to 
file the appeal. Neither the Act nor the pertinent regulations grant the AAO authority to extend 
this time limit. · 
Although thepetitioner's prior counsel 1 dated the Form 1-2908 July 27,2012, it was not received 
by U.S. Citizenship and Immigrat.ion Services until August 1, 2012, or 34 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 o(ficial 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. 
In the alternative, the appeal will be summarily dismissed. Part 3 of the Form 1·290B indudes a 
space for the petitioner to "[p ]rovide a statement explaining any erroneous conclusion of law or 
1 The Form 1-2908 was signed by attorney However, tiid not submit a new Form G-28 
indicating his continued representation of the petitioner ' on appeal. Rather, submitted a copy of a Form G~ 
28 that was signed on July II, 20 II prior to the appeal proceeding . The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 292.4(a) as wel_l as 
the instructions on the Forms 1-2908 and G-28 specifically indicate that an appeal must be accompanied by a new 
Form G-28. Without a newly tiled Form G-28, the record does not establish that the appeal was tiled by a party 
with standing in the case. The reguiation at 8 C.F.R. § I 03.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(/) states that an appeal tiled by a person or 
entity not entitled to tile it must be rejected as improperly tiled. The appeal is rejected for this additional reason and 
the petitioner is considered to be self-represented. 
(b)(6)~-- . 
Page 3 
fact in the decision being appealed." Counsel states: "A brief and/or additional evidence will be 
submitted to the. AAO." 
Counsel's statement fails to identify any erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the director's 
decision. Counsel does not specifically challenge any of the director's findings or point to 
specific errors in the director's analyses of the documentary evidence submitted for the 
categories of evidence at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). Further, counsel does not explain how the 
specific documentary evidence that the petitioner submitted supports a finding of eligibility. The 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v) provides that "[a]n officer to whom an appeal is taken 
shall summarily dismiss any appeal when the party concerned fails to identify specifically any 
erroneous conclusion oflaw or statement of fact for the appeal." In this matter, counsel has not 
identified as a proper basis for the appeal an erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of fact in 
the director's decision. 
Counsel indicated that a brief and/or evidence would be submitted to the AAO within 30 days. The 
appeal was filed on August I, 2012. As of this date, more than five months later, the AAO has 
received nothing further. · 
As stated in 8 C..F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v), an appeal shall be summarily . disrri.issed if the party 
concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for 
the appeal. The petitioner has not specifically addressed the reasons stated for denia\ and has not 
provided any additional evidence pertaining to his eligibility for the classification sought. 
Therefore, if not rejected, the appeal would be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected: