dismissed EB-1C Case: Multinational Management

L1.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U. S. Cltizenshiu and Immigration Services 
identifying data dell 
identifying data deleted to 
 Ofice of Administrarive Appeals MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privac) 
 U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: - OFFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
LIN 07 079 50050 
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 BENEFICIARY: 
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. tj 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). 
John F. Grissom 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition. The matter is 
currently before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected as 
improperly filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 9 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(2)(i) states in part the following: 
If an appeal is filed by an attorney or representative without a properly executed Notice of 
Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative (Form G-28) entitling that person to file 
the appeal, the appeal is considered improperly filed. 
In the instant matter, 
 filed an appeal as counsel on behalf of the beneficiary subsequent to the 
director's adverse decision with regard to the petitioner's Form 1-140.' However, the record does not contain a 
Form G-28 showing that 
 is authdrized to undertake representation in the petitioner's behalf. The 
requirement for the submission of a Form G-28 is ex~resslv stated both in the regulations and in the Form I- 
- 
290~, Notice of Appeal to the AAO. ~lthou~h 
 submitted a properly executed Form G- 
28 along with the Form 1-140, she is not the attorney that filed the petitioner's Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal 
or Motion. Rather, the individual that did file the Form I-290B on behalf of the petitioner is not 
the petitioner's authorized representative. 
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. tj 103.2(a)(3). As the beneficiary and his representative are not 
recognized parties, counsel is not authorized to file an appeal, and it must therefore be rejected as improperly 
filed. 8 C.F.R. 9 103.3(a)(l)(iii)(B); 8 C.F.R. 9 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(l); 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(2)(i). 
Accordingly, the record in the present matter shows that the appeal was improperly filed and must be rejected. 
See 8 C.F.R. 9 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(I). 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected. 
1 
Counsel submitted a cover page dated November 13, 2008 along with submissions in support of the appeal. Counsel 
noted that the appeal was filed "on behalf of our client ,]I' thereby indicating counsel's understanding that he 
was representing the beneficiary, not the petitioner.