dismissed EB-1C Case: Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 20076325 
Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: APR. 26, 2022 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Multinational Managers or Executives 
The Petitioner , an engineering consulting firm, seeks to permanently employ the Beneficiary as its 
president under the first preference immigrant classification for multinational executives or managers. 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(1 )(C), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(1 )(C). This 
classification allows a U.S. employer to permanently transfer a qualified foreign employee to the 
United States to work in an executive or managerial capacity. 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish, as required, that: (1) the Petitioner will employ the Beneficiary in the United States in a 
managerial or executive capacity; (2) the Beneficiary has been employed abroad in a managerial or 
executive capacity; and (3) the Beneficiary engaged in qualifying employment abroad for at least one 
year during the three years preceding the filing of the petition. We dismissed the Petitioner's appeal 
from the Director's decision. The Petitioner filed a combined motion to reopen and reconsider , which 
we dismissed as untimely filed . The matter is now before us on a second combined motion to reopen 
and reconsider. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon review, we will dismiss the combined motion. 
A motion to reopen must state the new facts to be proved in the reopened proceeding and be supported 
by affidavits or other documentary evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2). A motion to reconsider must 
state the reasons forreconsideration and establish thatthe decision was incorrect based on the evidence 
of record at the time of the initial decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). A motion that does not meet 
applicable requirements shall be dismissed . 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4) . 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § I 03.5(a)(l)(i) limits our authority to reopen or reconsider to instances 
where the Petitioner has shown "proper cause" for that action. Thus, to merit reopening or 
reconsideration , a petitioner must not only meet the formal filing requirements (such as submission of 
a properly completed Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion , with the correct fee), but also show 
proper cause for granting the motion. We cannot grant a motion that does not meet applicable 
requirements. See8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4) . 
Any motion to reconsider must be filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to 
reconsider. Any motion to reopen must be filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks 
to reopen, except that failure to file before this period expires, may be excused in the discretion of 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) where the petitioner demonstrates that the delay 
was reasonable and was beyond the petitioner's control. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l )(i). 
Nebraska Service Center denied the petition January 1 7, 2020. We dismissed the Petitioner's appeal 
from that decision on December 30, 2020. The Applicant filed a combined motion to reopen and 
reconsider on March 26, 2021. We dismissed that motion as untimely filed on July 21, 2021, stating 
You must file a motion on an unfavorable decision within 33 calendar days of the date 
we mailed the decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l), 103.8(b ). As well, on March 23, 2020, 
USCIS issued Leadership Guidance providing flexibility allowing up to 63 days from 
the date of the decision from the submission of aFmml-290B. On December 30, 2020, 
we mailed the unfavorable decision to you. Your Form I-290B was received at the 
designated filing location on March 26, 2021, which is 86 days after the decision. 
On motion, the Petitioner states: 
We filed the I-290B timely, on or about January 20, 2021 with a filing fee of$700. We 
had received a notice from USCIS announcing effective October 2, 2020 USCIS' filing 
fees were updated. Therefore, we submitted a check in the amount of$700 as the new 
filing fee. 
USCIS failed to send us a receipt notice or cash our check .... 
On oraboutMarch 25, 2021 USCISretumed our I-290B with a Rejection Notice stating 
the case was rejected due to incorrect filing fees. After much research I found the 
following information: 
On September 29, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of 
California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction and stay on implementation 
of the 2020.final USCIS fee rule[.] 
Therefore, USCIS knew prior to announcing the fee increase effective October 2, 2020 
that the []court had already filed an injunction against this [increase]. 
The Petitioner, which bears the burden of proof, does not submit a copy of the claimed March 2021 
rejection notice, or any evidence that it attempted to file a timely motion in January 2021. The 
Petitioner's untimely motion in March 2021 did not include any mention or evidence of a priorattempt 
to file a timely motion. 
The record does not show that USCIS provided inaccurate fee information that prevented the Petitioner 
from filing a timely appeal with the proper fee. While the proposed fee increase would have been 
effective on October 2, 2020, USCIS did not announce the fee increase in October. Rather, the fee 
increase was published in the Federal Register in early August 2020, two months before it would have 
2 
taken effect. 1 The Petitioner does not submit any evidence that users continued to publicize the 
proposed fee increase after the injunction was issued in late September. 
The cover page to our December 2020 dismissal notice advised the Petitioner of its right to file 
motions, and provided information about the procedure for doing so. We advised: "The Form r-290B 
website (www.uscis.gov/i-290b) contains the latest information on fee, filing location, and other 
requirements." Because the fee increase was enjoined before its effective date, that website was never 
updated to reflect the higher fee. The website showed the correct filing fee ($67 5) in January 2021, 
during the time window for filing a timely motion. 2 
Our December 2020 dismissal notice told the Petitioner where to get timely and accurate information 
about how to file a motion, including the correct amount of the filing fee. Therefore, if the Petitioner 
did, as claimed, attempt to file a motion in January 2021, any delay resulting from submission of an 
incorrect fee was neither reasonable nor beyond the Petitioner's control. 
The Petitioner's latest filing includes no new evidence. The Petitioner submits copies of the same 
exhibits submitted in support of the untimely motion. This evidence concerns the Petitioner's business 
activities, rather than the timeliness of the prior motion or any users communications that would 
have caused the Petitioner to submit the wrong filing fee. Therefore, the Petitioner's latest filing does 
not meet the requirements of a motion to reopen. 
The Petitioner has not identified any error of law of policy in our July 2021 decision, or otherwise 
shown that the decision was incorrect based on the record atthe time. Therefore, the Petitioner's latest 
filing does not meet the requirements of a motion to reconsider. 
Because the Petitioner's filing does not meet the requirements of a motion to reopen or a motion to 
reconsider, we must dismiss the motion under 8 e.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). 
ORDER: The motion to reopen is dismissed. 
FURTHER ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed. 
1 See 85 Fed. Reg. 46788 (Aug. 3, 2020). 
2 See archived copies of the web page from December 18, 2020, at https://web.archive.org/web/20201218083452/https:// 
www.uscis.gov/i-290b, and January 23, 2021, at https://web.archive.org/web/20210123211129/https://www.uscis.gov/ 
i-290b. 
3