dismissed EB-1C Case: Management

PUBLlCCOPY 
DATE: DEC 0 9 2011 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
u.s. Department of Homeland Security 
lJ. S. Citizenship and Immigration SelVices 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
u.s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
Petition: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Multinational Executive or Manager Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(1)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.c. § 1153(b)(I)(C) 
IN 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. 
Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas 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 untimely filed. 
In order to properly file an appeal, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party 
or the attorney or representative of record must file 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.Sa(b). The date of filing is not the date of mailing, but the date of actual receipt. See 8 C.F.R. § 
103.2(a)(7)(i). 
The record indicates that the service center director issued the decision on August 18, 2009. It is noted that 
the service center director properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 33 days to file the appeal. Neither 
the Act nor the pertinent regulations grant the AAO authority to extend this time limit. 
The Form 1-290B was received by the service center on September 30, 2009, or 43 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, ifan untimely appeal meets the requirements ofa 
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 Director of the Texas Service Center. See 8 C.F.R. 
§ 1 03.S(a)(1 )(ii). 
The matter will therefore be returned to the director. If the director determines that the late appeal meets the 
requirements of a motion, the motion shall be granted and a new decision will be issued. 
As the appeal was untimely filed, the appeal must be rejected. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.