dismissed EB-1C Case: Not Specified

identifying data deietd to 
DEVent clearly unw-ted 
A .?Aea , 
'is :::kSC"rl2! ~rrv9c)r 
U.S. Department of flomeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
MAIL STOP 2090 
U. S, Citizenship 
and Immigration 
File: Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
LIN 07 137 51797 
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 1 153(b)(l)(C) 
IN BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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). 
John F. Grissom, Acting Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, revoked approval of the nonirnmigrant visa 
petition. The matter is currently before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The 
appeal will be rejected as untimely filed. 
Pursuant to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 205.2(d), a petitioner must file an appeal from a decision 
revoking approval of a petition within 15 days after the service of the notice of the revocation. 
Petitioners that are served with the notice by mail are allowed 18 days in which file an appeal. 
In accordance with 8 C.F.R. 8 103.2(a)(7)(i), an application received in a U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) office shall be stamped to show the time and date of actual receipt, if 
it is properly signed, executed, and accompanied by the correct fee. For 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 director issued the decision on January 30, 2008. The appeal was 
received by USCIS on February 29, 2008, or 30 days after the decision was issued. Therefore, the 
appeal was untimely filed. Although the AAO acknowledges that the director erroneously informed 
the petitioner that it had 30 days in which to file an appeal from the decision revoking prior approval 
of the petition, there is no statute or regulation that allows either the director or the AAO the 
discretionary authority to extend the time period specified in 8 C.F.R. 8 205.2(d). 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(I) states that an appeal which is not filed within the 
time allowed must be rejected as improperly filed. Accordingly, the appeal in the instant case will 
be rejected as untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 103,3(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. The official having jurisdiction over a 
motion is the official who made the last decision in the proceeding, in this case the service center 
director. See 8 C.F.R. 4 103,5(a)(l)(ii). 
The regulations at 8 C.F.R. 8 103.5(a)(2) state, in pertinent part, that a motion to reopen must state 
the new facts to be provided in the reopened proceeding and be supported by affidavits or other 
documentary evidence. 
Based on the plain meaning of "new," a new fact is found to be evidence that was not available and 
could not have been discovered or presented in the previous proceeding.' 
In the present matter, the counsel's brief in support of the motion merely addresses the director's 
finding in the revocation decision. None of the information provided in the brief is such that it can 
The word "new" is defined as "1. having existed or been made for only a short time . . . 3. Just discovered, 
found, or learned <new evidence> . . . ." 
 WEBSTER'S 11 NEW RIVERSIDE UNIVERSITY DICTIONARY 792 
(1 984)(emphasis in original). 
Page 3 
be deemed new information that was previously unavailable. Therefore, the petitioner does not meet 
the requirements of a motion to reopen. 
The regulations at 8 C.F.R. $ 103.5(a)(3) state, in pertinent part: 
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 [USCIS] 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. 
In the instant case, counsel does not cite any pertinent legal precedent decisions that would indicate 
an error on the part of the director in revoking the immigrant petition. 
As such, the untimely appeal in this matter 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.F.R. 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2). 
As the appeal was untimely filed and does not qualify as a motion, the appeal must be rejected. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is rejected as untimely filed.