dismissed EB-1C Case: Management

U.S. Department of flomeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
ideil;i;j:L;:: d:gi &!3&(3 U, 
-, 
prever,t c:ear!y unwznanted 
invasion of peisonai privac~ 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
7-- T- 
i2u3LIC COPY 
Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: DEC 1 9 200R 
LIN 06 258 52542 
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) 
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. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to have 
considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5 for 
the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided your case by 
filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider, as required by 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
-qFz2. 
John F. Gnssom, Actlng ief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
k 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition. The 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
rejected as improperly filed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(l). 
The petitioner is a Florida corporation that seeks to employ the beneficiary as its general manager. 
Accordingly, the petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as an employment-based immigrant 
pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 
8 1153(b)(l)(C), as a multinational executive or manager. After reviewing the evidence submitted, 
the director denied the petition based on the petitioner's failure to establish that it would employ the 
beneficiary in a managerial or executive capacity. 
On February 19, 2008, the beneficiary filed a Form I-290B with the service center on his own behalf 
purporting to appeal the decision of the director dated January 19, 2008.' The beneficiary did not 
indicate that he was signing the Form I-290B on behalf of the petitioner. Moreover, the beneficiary 
used his home address, and not the business address of the petitioner, in completing the Form I- 
290B. Therefore, it must be concluded that the beneficiary filed the Form I-1290B in his personal 
capacity, and not on behalf of the petitioner. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services regulations 
specifically prohibit a beneficiary of a visa petition, or a representative acting on a beneficiary's 
behalf, from filing a petition; the beneficiary of a visa petition is not a recognized party in a 
proceeding. 
 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(a)(3). 
 As the beneficiary is not a recognized party, he is not 
authorized to file an appeal. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(l)(iii)(B). 
As such, the appeal was improperly filed and it will be rejected. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(I). 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is rejected as improperly filed. 
' The AAO notes that the record has been supplemented with a recent Form G-28, Notice of Entry of Appearance as 
Attorney or Representative. However, the Form G-28 is undated, thereby making it impossible to determine whether it 
was submitted at or around the time of the appeal and whether the counsel named in the Form G-28 was intended to 
represent the petitioner on appeal. It is noted that neither the petitioner's name nor any information pertaining to the 
counsel named in the Form G-28 was included in the Form I-290B to indicate the attorney's representation of the 
petitioner on appeal.