remanded EB-1C Case: Operations Management

r . 
identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarr~nted 
invasion of personal prIvacy 
PUBLIC COllY 
File: Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
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 
u.s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Date: FEB 15 2011 
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. § IIS3(b)(1)(C) 
IN BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents 
related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please be advised that 
any further inquiry that you might have conceming your case must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. The 
specific requirements for filing such a request can be found at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. 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 $630. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i) requires that any motion must be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
.... 
-Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, revoked approval of the immigrant visa petition. 
The matter is currently before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
rejected. The case will be remanded to the Nebraska Service Center to be treated as a motion. 
The petitioner is a California corporation that seeks to employ the beneficiary as its operations manager. 
Accordingly, the petitioner endeavors to classifY the beneficiary as an employment-based immigrant pursuant 
to section 203(b)(1)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § I IS3(b)(l)(C), as a 
multinational executive or manager. 
In a decision dated July 24, 2009, the director revoked approval of the petition concluding that the petitioner 
failed to respond to the June 9, 2009 notice of intent to revoke (NOIR), which was based on the finding that 
the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary is employed in the United States in a qualifYing 
managerial or executive capacity. The petitioner filed an appeal disputing the director's findings both with 
regard to the timely filing of the response to the NOIR and the beneficiary's qualifYing employment with the 
U.S. entity. 
Pursuant to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 20S.2(d), in order to properly file an appeal from a decision revoking 
approval of a petition, the appeal must be filed within IS days after the service of the notice of the revocation. 
In accordance with 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(a)(7)(i), an application received in a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (USerS) 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 July 24, 2009. The appeal was received by 
USCIS on August 19, 2009, or 26 days after the decision was issued. Therefore, the appeal was untimely 
filed. Although the director erroneously instructed the petitioner that it had thirty days in which to file the 
appeal, the AAO cannot circumvent or overlook the time limits specified at 8 C.F.R. § 20S.2(d), which clearly 
state that the petitioner has only IS days in which to file an appeal from a revocation. As the appeal in the 
present matter was untimely filed, it must be rejected pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2}(v)(B)(l). 
Notwithstanding the rejection of the instant appeal, regulations at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2} determined 
that USCIS must treat certain untimely appeals as motions pursuant to the following guidelines: 
If an untimely appeal meets the requirements of a motion to reopen as described in 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.S(a)(2) of this part or a motion to reconsider as described in 8 C.F.R. § 103.S(a)(3) of 
this part, the appeal must be treated as a motion, and a decision must be made on the merits of 
the case. 
Accordingly, this case will be remanded to the Nebraska Service Center for the purpose of considering all the 
evidence of record, including the evidence submitted in support of the appeal in which the petitioner 
addressed the issues raised by the director in the final notice. 
ORDER: The appeal is hereby rejected. The case is remanded to the director for further 
consideration.