dismissed EB-1C Case: Multinational Management

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal pnvacy 
PUBUCCOpy 
u.s. DepartmeDt of Homeland Security 
U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
DATE: JUL 0 6 2011 OFFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Multinational Executive or Manager Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(I)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(1)(C) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents 
related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please be advised that 
any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. The 
specific requirements for filing such a request can be found at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. All motions must be 
submitted to the office that originally decided your case by filing a Form 1-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, 
with a fee of $630. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(1)(i) requires that any motion must be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscls.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition. The petitioner 
subsequently filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in a decision 
dated December 2, 2008. The matter is now before the AAO on a second appeal. The appeal will be rejected 
based on its improper and untimely filing. 
In order to properly file an appeal, the regulation at 8 C.P.R. § 1 03.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party 
must file the complete appeal within 30 days of after service of the unfavorable decision. If the decision was 
mailed, the appeal must be filed within 33 days. See 8 C.P.R. § 103.5a(b). The date of filing is not the date of 
mailing, but the date of actual receipt, which shall be stamped to show the time and date of actual receipt, if it 
is properly signed, executed, and accompanied by the correct fee. See 8 C.P.R. § 103.2(a)(7)(i). Por 
calculating the date of filing, the appeal 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 AAO issued a decision dismissing the previously filed appeal on December 2, 
2008. The record also shows that the petitioner attempted to file an appeal to that decision on or about 
January 2,2009.
1 
However, as the petitioner erroneously submitted the appeal directly to the AAO, it was 
returned to the petitioner with a notice reminding the petitioner that any subsequent submissions must be filed 
with the u.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) office where the petitioner was originally filed. 
Here, the petition was filed and a decision was subsequently issued by the Nebraska Service Center. 
Accordingly, the petitioner filed the appeal at the proper office where the appeal was received on January 12, 
2009, or 41 days after the AAO issued its decision. 
Neither the Act nor the pertinent regulations grant the AAO authority to extend the 33-day time limit for 
filing an appeal. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § I 03.3(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. 
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.P.R. § 103.5(a)(2). A motion to reconsider must state the 
reasons for reconsideration and be supported by any pertinent precedent decisions to establish that the 
decision was based on an incorrect application of law or Service policy. A motion to reconsider a decision on 
an application or petition must, when filed, also establish that the decision was incorrect based on the 
evidence of record at the time of the initial decision. 8 C.P.R. § 103.5(a)(3). A motion that does not meet 
applicable requirements shall be dismissed. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). 
Here, the untimely appeal does not meet the requirements of a motion to reopen or a motion to reconsider. 
Therefore, there is no requirement to treat the appeal as a motion under 8 C.P.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2). 
Additionally, the AAO notes that there is no statutory or regulatory provision that permits the petitioner to file 
more than one appeal with regard to the same petition. See 8 C.P.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(ii). Although 8 C.P.R. 
§ 103.5(a) permits the petitioner to file a motion to reopen or reconsider the AAO's decision on appeal, the 
I See PedEx receipt showing a delivery date of January 2, 2009. 
Page 3 
Fonn 1-290B in the present matter clearly indicates that the petitioner intended to file an appeal rather than a 
motion, apparently seeking to appeal the AAO's decision dismissing the appeal filed earlier in this 
proceeding. 
As there is no law or regulation pennitting the filing of multiple appeals of the same petition, for this 
additional reason, the petitioner's current appeal must be rejected. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.