dismissed EB-1C

dismissed EB-1C Case: Multinational Management

📅 Date unknown 👤 Company 📂 Multinational Management

Decision Summary

The motion to reopen or reconsider was rejected as untimely filed. The motion was received 39 days after the decision was issued, which is beyond the 33-day filing period, and the petitioner did not demonstrate that the delay was reasonable or beyond their control.

Criteria Discussed

Timely Filing Of Motion

Sign up free to download the original PDF

View Full Decision Text
U.S. ~epactrnent of fiomeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: WAC 03 124 53000 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: rF~ 2 Q 1006 
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. 8 1153(b)(l)(C) 
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. 
/ 
Robert P. Wiemann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 03 124 53000 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California Service Center, denied the employment-based visa petition. In a 
decision dated August 8, 2005, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) dismissed the petitioner's appeal. 
The matter is again before the AAO on motion to reopen or reconsider. The motion will be rejected as 
untimely filed. 
In order to properly file a motion, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(l)(i) provides that the petitioner must 
file the motion within thirty 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. 5 103.5a(b). The failure to file before this period expires 
may be excused at the discretion of the AAO where it is demonstrated that the delay was reasonable and 
beyond the control of the petitioner. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
The record indicates that the AAO issued its decision on August 8,2005. According to the date stamp on the 
motion to reopen or reconsider filed by the petitioner's counsel, it was received by Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (CIS) on September 16, 2005 or 39 days after the decision was issued. On motion, the 
petitioner has not requested that the failure to file the motion within the 30-day time period be excused. 
As a matter of discretion, the applicant's failure to file the motion within the period allowed will not be 
excused as either reasonable or beyond the control of the applicant. Accordingly, the motion will be rejected 
as untimely filed. 
As the motion was untimely filed, the motion must be rejected. 
ORDER: 
 The motion is rejected as untimely filed. 
Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial

MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.

Avoid This in My Petition →

No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.