dismissed EB-1C Case: Unspecified

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PUBLIC COPY 
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. 4 1153(b)(l)(C) 
IN BEHALF OF BENEFICIARY: 
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. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
SRC 05 148 51 104 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: 
 The preference visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service Center, on 
September 26, 2005. On February 27, 2007, a motion to reopen the matter was filed with the director. On 
April 23,2007, the director dismissed the motion to reopen as untimely. On May 23,2007, another motion to 
reopen was filed with the director. On July 30, 2007, the director granted the motion, reopened the matter, 
and requested additional evidence. On September 11, 2007, additional evidence was submitted and, on 
October 23, 2007, the director denied the petition. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals 
Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 
 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(I). 
The petitioner, a Florida corporation, endeavored to classify the beneficiary as an employment-based 
immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(C) of the Act as a multinational executive or manager. On October 
23, 2007, the director denied the petition after concluding that the petitioner failed to establish (1) that it has 
the ability to pay the beneficiary the proffered wage; or (2) that it is the beneficiary's actual employer. 
The record contains several Forms G-28, Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative, dated as 
follows: April 5,2005; November 30,2006; May 21,2007; and November 21,2007. The Form G-28 dated 
April 5, 2005 authorizesto represent the petitioner. The other three Forms G-28 were 
signed by the beneficiary, with no indication that he signed them as an authorized representative of the 
petitioner or on behalf of the petitioner. Therefore, the attorney identified in the Forms G-28 dated November 
30, 2006, May 21, 2007, and November 21, 2007, and who is not associated with, is 
counsel to the beneficiary, not counsel to the petitioner. The Form I-290B that was submitted in response to 
the October 23, 2007 decision was signed and filed by the attorney identified in the latter three Forms G-28 
on behalf of the beneficiary. It is noted that the entire record of proceeding fails to contain a Form G-28 
appointing the attorney who signed the Form I-290B as counsel to the petitioner. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services regulations specifically prohibit a beneficiary of a visa petition, or a 
representative acting on a beneficiary's behalf, from filing a petition; the beneficiary of a visa petition is not a 
recognized party in a proceeding. 8 C.F.R. $ 103.2(a)(3). As the beneficiary and his representative are not 
recognized parties, counsel is not authorized to file an appeal. 8 C.F.R. $ 103.3(a)(l)(iii)(B). 
As the appeal was not properly filed, it must be rejected. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(I). 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.