dismissed EB-1C Case: Unknown

identifying dnta deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy 
PUBLIC COpy 
DATE: OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
JUN 2 2 2011 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
Petition: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Multinational Executive or Manager Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(1)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.c. § 1153(b)(1)(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. 
Thank you, 
Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition. The petitioner 
subsequently filed a motion to reopen and reconsider. The director denied the motion to reconsider, but 
granted the motion to reopen and later issued a notice requesting additional information. The director later 
issued a second decision denying the 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. § 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.P.R. § 103.5a(b). 
In accordance with 8 C.P.R. § 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 second decision on May 29, 2009. It is noted that the director 
properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 33 days to file the appeal. The director also expressly 
instructed the petitioner that the appeal may not be filed directly with the AAO, but rather must be filed at the 
address noted at the top of the page, which identifies the service center where the original decision was 
issued. As noted above, the decision in the present matter was issued by the Texas Service Center. Despite 
that fact, the petitioner initially submitted the appeal directly to the AAO on June 29, 2009. Therefore, the 
AAO returned the appeal back to the petitioner along with a notice dated June 30, 2009, informing the 
petitioner once again of the proper protocol for filing an appeal. The petitioner subsequently resubmitted the 
appeal at the appropriate service center office where it was received on July 9, 2009, or 41 days after the 
decision was issued. Therefore, the appeal was untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(1) 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. 
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. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2) states, however, 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.F.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.F.R. § l03.5(a)(3). A motion that does not meet 
applicable requirements shall be dismissed. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). 
,. 
Page 3 
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.F.R. § l03.3(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.