dismissed
EB-1C
dismissed EB-1C Case: Unknown
Decision Summary
The appeal was dismissed on procedural grounds, not on its merits. The director's decision was issued on May 9, 2006, requiring an appeal to be filed within 33 days, but the appeal was received on June 13, 2006, 35 days later, rendering it untimely.
Criteria Discussed
Timely Filing Of Appeal
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
identifying data deleted to
prevent clearly unwarranted
bvasion of personal privscy
PUBLIC COPY
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rrn. 3000
Washington, DC 20529
U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration
EAC 06 009 50438
Date:
JUN 0 8 2W
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. fj 1 153(b)(l)(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.
(" -7- L-
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
DISCUSSION: The Director, Vermont 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. 5 103.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party
must file the 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. 5 103.5a(b).
In accordance with 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(a)(7)(i), an application received in a Citizenship and Immigration
Services (CIS) 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 May 9,2006. It is noted that the director properly
gave notice to the petitioner that it had 33 days to file the appeal. The appeal was received by CIS on
Tuesday, June 13,2006, or 35 days after the decision was issued. Therefore, the appeal was untimely filed.
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(l) 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. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(t) 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. 5 103.5(a)(l)(ii). The
director declined to treat the late appeal as a motion and forwarded the matter to the AAO.
ORDER:
The appeal is rejected as untimely filed. 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.