dismissed EB-2 Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
DATEJUN 2 8 2013 OFFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrativ e Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachus etts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced 
Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b )(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2) 
ON 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 concerning your case must be made to that office. 
If you believe the AAO inappropriately applied the law in reaching its decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen in 
accordance with the instructions on Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $630. The 
specific requirements for filing such a motion can be found at 8 C .F.R. § 103.5. Do not file any motion 
directly with the AAO. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i) requires any motion to be filed within 
30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
flo.eLW V11~o 
Ron Rosenberg 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
Page2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition. The 
petitioner appealed this denial to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO), and, on March 8, 2013, 
the AAO dismissed the appeal. Counsel for the petitioner has filed a motion to reopen the AAO's 
decision in accordance with 8 C.P.R. § 103.5. The motion will be dismissed pursuant to 8 C.P.R. 
§§ 103.5(a)(1)(i), 103.5(a)(1)(iii)(C), and 103.5(a)(4). 
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) regulations require that motions to 
reopen be filed within 30 days of the underlying decision, except that failure to timely file a motion 
to reopen may be excused at the discretion of USCIS where it is demonstrated that the delay was 
reasonable and beyond the affected party's control. 8 C.P.R. § 103.5(a)(1)(i). In this matter, the 
motion was filed on April 15, 2013, 38 days after the AAO's March 8, 2013 decision. The record 
indicates that the AAO's decision was mailed to both the petitioner at its business address and to its 
counsel of record. As the record does not establish that the failure to file the motion within 30 days 
of the decision was reasonable and beyond the affected party's control, the motion is untimely and 
must be dismissed for that reason. 
Furthermore, the regulation at 8 C.P.R. §§ 103.5(a)(1)(iii)(C) requires that motions be 
"[a]ccompanied by a statement about whether or not the validity of the unfavorable decision has 
been or is the subject of any judicial proceeding." The instant motion does not contain this 
statement. As the regulation at 8 C.P.R. § 103.5(a)(4) states that a motion that does not meet 
applicable requirements must be dismissed , the instant motion will also be dismissed for this reason. 
Motions for the reopening or reconsideration of immigration proceedings are disfavored for the same 
reasons as petitions for rehearing and motions for a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence. 
See INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323 (1992)(citing INS v. Abudu, 485 U.S. 94 (1988)). A party 
seeking to reopen a proceeding bears a "heavy burden." INS v. Abudu, 485 U.S. at 110. With the 
current motion, the movant has not met that burden. The motion will be dismissed. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. § 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the motion will be 
dismissed, the proceedings will not be reopened and the previous decisions of the director and the AAO 
will not be disturbed. 
ORDER: The motion is dismissed.