dismissed EB-1C Case: Management

PllBLIC copy 
ie4*dabW to 
prebv- ckoly unWmTou1ted 
hv.dOa of prj vacy 
File: 
U.S. Department of IIomeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave.. N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: Ec 0 6 
Petition: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Multinational Executive or Manager Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(l)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(C) 
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. 
__--- 
 -7 
___--- & 
--. "/-- - 
 * 
~06~. W~emann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 , 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the nonimmigrant visa petition. The matter is 
currently 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.F.R. 9 103.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party 
must file the 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. 9 103.5a(b). 
In accordance with 8 C.F.R. 9 103.2(a)(7)(i), anpapplication received in a CIS office shall be stamped to show 
the time and date of actual receipt, if it is properly signed, executed, and accompanied by the correct fee. For 
calculating the date of filing, the motion shall be regarded as properly filed on the date that it is so stamped by 
the service center or district office. 
The record indicates that the director issued the decision on April 13, 2006. It is noted that the director 
properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 33 days to file the appeal and specifically stated that the 
appeal must be filed at the Texas Service Center. counsel' apparently attempted to comply with those 
instructions by submitting the appeal to the address listed at the top right hand comer of the cover page of the 
director's decision. However, proper filing instructions, which are found at the U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Service's (CIS) website, provide the applicant with the correct mailing address for appeals and 
motions. The address used by counsel was not the correct address. Therefore, counsel's initial submission 
was returned. Counsel then attempted to file the appeal directly to the AAO where the appeal was received 
on May 15, 2006. The AAO promptly returned the appeal. to the petitioner with a notice explaining that the 
AAO does not accept or process applications and instructed the petitioner to view the filing instructions 
provided at the USCIS website. Although counsel ultimately complied with those instructions, the appeal 
was not properly received by CIS until May 22, 2006, or 39 days after the decision was issued. Therefore, the 
appeal was untimely filed. 
Counsel cites 8 C.F.R. 9 103.5(a), asserting that the AAO h2s discretion to accept motions and appeals even 
when untimely filed. Counsel's argument, however, is incorrect. While 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(l)(i) specifically 
allows for the AAO's discretion with regard to untimely filed motions over which it has jurisdiction, there are 
- 
no regulations that allow the AAO to use its discretion ... accepting untimely filed appeals. The regulation at 
8 C.F.R. 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(I) states that an appeal which is not filed within the time allowed must be 
rejected as improperly filed. Accordingly, the appeal in the instant case will be rejected as untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 9 103.3(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 service center director. See 8 C.F.R. 9 103.5(a)(l)(ii). The 
director declined to treat the late appeal as a motion and forwarded the matter to the AAO. 
I 
 The Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative (Form G-28) submitted by counsel, Mario Gonzalez, 
was not signed by the petitioner. As such, counsel's appearance may not be entered on behalf of the petitioner, and prior 
counsel's representation may not be withdrawn on that basis. 
Page 3 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is rejected as untimely filed.