dismissed EB-2 Case: Unknown

,
'I
.....
identifYing;data.deletedto'",
pievoot clearly unwarr~ted
invasionofpetSOllll'pn'IIQY
rUBLIC COpy,"
.'.' "
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
20 Mass, Ave., N.W.; Rm. 3000
, Washington, DC ~0529 '
u.S. Citizenship ,
and Immigration,
Services '
File:
SRC 06 241 52885
Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: MA'(02 2111
,IN RE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
Petition: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker a~ 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) .
IN BEHALF OF PETITIONER:
',...
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.
~~~~
$R.obe.rt .P. ~iema~; Ghief ...
'.. Admimstrattve Appeals, Office
", .
www.us~is.gov
-.j-
" ')j!'
DISCUSSION: The 'Director, Texas Service Center, denied the nonimmigrant visa petition. The matter is
now'before the Administrative Appeals Office.(AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected as untimely
filed ..
r· .
In order t6 properly fil,e an appeal, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party
must file the complete appeal within 30 days of after service of the UIlfavorable.decision. If the decision was
mailed, the appealmiJst be filed within 33 days. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.5a(b) .
. The record indicates that the director issued the decision on August ,24, 2006. It is noted that the director
properly gave notice to the petitioner that it hadJ3 days to file the appeal. Although counsel dated the appeal
September 25, .2006, it was received by Citizenship and Immigration Services (CiS) on Wednesday,
September 27,2006, or 34 days after the decision was issued. AccordIngly, the appeal was untiI11ely filed.
. .. , .'
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2) states that, if an untimely appeal meets the n:quirements of a
motion to reopen or amotion, 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 service center director. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(I)(ii). The
.director declined to treat the late appeal as 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.