dismissed EB-2 Case: Unknown

(b)(6)
DATE: FEB 0 6 ·2013 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
'Beneficiary: 
OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Cit-izenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
· 20 Massachusells Ave., N.W., MS 20'10 
Washing10n, 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(h)(2)(A) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)(A) 
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. 
Thank you, 
Ron Rosenberg 
Acting Chief,. Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(5)
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition, which 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 or the attorney ·or representative of record must submit .the complete 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.F.R. § 1C>3.8(b ). The date of filing is not the date of submission, but the 
date of actual receipt with the required fee. · See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(a)(7)(i). 
The record indicates that the serviCe center director issued the decision on August 22, 2011. It is 
noted that the service center director properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 30 days to file 
the appeal, as the denial was sent via facsimile. Neither the Act nor the pertinent regulations grant 
the AAO authority to extend this time limit. 
Although counsel dated the Form 1-2908 September 20, 2011, it was not received by the service 
center until September 23, 2011, or 32 days after the decision was issued. Accordingly, the appeal 
was untimely filed. 
The regulation at .S C.F,.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2) states . that, if an untimely appeal meets the 
requirements ofa motion io 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. The official having jurisdiction over a 
motion is the official who made the last decision in the proceeding, in this case the Director of the 
Texas Service Center. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(ii) . . The dire~;:tor determined that the late appeal 
did not meet the requirements .of a motion and forwarded the matter to the AAO. 
As the appeal was untimely filed, the appeal must be rejected. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected~