dismissed EB-2 Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
U.S. Dep11rtment of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and lmmig,ation Services 
Office of Administrative Appeals 
20 MaSsachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529~2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
anQ. Immigration 
Services 
DATE: SEP 2 5 2013 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
lN Rp: Petitioner: 
Ben~ficiaty: 
PETITION: . Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced 
Degr¢e ot 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 :6EHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision ?f the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in yo\Jt case. J'his is a non­
precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish agency policy 
through non-precedent decisions. 
Thank you, 
~r:O.c-
Ron Rosenberr--
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www . .,.sds.gov · 
(b)(6) NON•PRECEPENT DECISION 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Tex:as Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition and the 
~atter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on <:u)peal. The appeal w111 be 
rejected as untimely filed. . . 
In order to properly file art appeal, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.~(a)(2){i) provides that the 
affected pa_rtyor the attorney or representative Of record must _submit the complete appeal withjn 30 
qays of service of the unfavorable . decision. If the decision was mailed, the appeal must be filed 
within '33 days. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.8(b). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 1.2 explains that when the last 
day O{(l period f(llls on a Saturday, Sunday, ot legal holiday, the period shall nin u.Qtil the end of the 
next day that is not a Satwda.,y, Sunday ; or legal holiday. The date of filing is not tbe elate of 
submission, but the date of · actual receipt with the proper signature and ihe requited fee. See 
8 .C,F.R. § 103.2(a)(7)(i). The regulatibii at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3{(l)(Z)(v)ffi)(J) proviqes that an appeal 
which is not filed within the time allowed must be rejected as improperly filed. 
The rec~rd indicates that the service center directo~ issued the deci_sion on January 3, 2013. It is 
p.oted t4at the service center director properly gave notice to the petitioner that he bad 33 Q(lys to file 
· · the -appeal. Neither the Act nor tbe pertinent regulations grant the AAO authority to extend this time limit. · · ·· · · 
Counsel dated the Form I-29013 februar -y 12, 2013, and it was not received by U.S. Citizenship and ' 
Immigration SerV'ices until, Februaty 13, 2013, or 41 days after the decision was issued. · 
AcCQt:dingly, tbe appeal was mitimely filed. 
The regulation at .8 C.F.R. § 103"3(a)(2)(v)(J3){2) st.(ltes that, if an untimely appea~ meets the 
req11ireinents of a motion to reopen of a motion to reconsider, the appe(ll must be treated as a motion, 
arid a decision m:List be mad~ on the merits Of the ·. case~ The . official having jurisdiction over a 
motion is the official Who made the }(lst dedsi()n in the proceeding, in this case the Dite.ctot Of the 
Texas Service Center. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(ii). The director deten:nined that the late appeal 
·did not meet the requirements of a motion and forwarded the matter to the MO. 
As the appeal wCI.s 11ntimely filed, the appeal mustbe rejected. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.