dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Civil Engineering

identifying. data deleted to 
vent CIn·,,·h! l1;",v·mrranted pre ,_c .. J'. . 
invasion of personal pnvacy 
PUBLlCCOPY 
DATE: SEP 051012 OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
IN RE: Pclitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. l)cparlmcnt of Homeland Sccurit)' 
U.S. Citin:nshir and Immigralion Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Ma~~iIl:hu:-,etls /\ve., N.W., MS 2()9(] 
Washington, DC 2()~2q-2U90 
u.s. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PETITION: immigrant Pelition for Alien Worker as a Memher of the Professions Holding all Advanccu 
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. Plcase he advised that 
any further in4uiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to Ihal olliee. 
Thank you. 
~~~ 
J. Perry Rhew U 
Chief. Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) Oil appeal. The AAO will 
reject the appeal. 
The petitioner is a civil structural engineering firm that seeks to classify the beneficiary under section 
203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.c. § 1153(b)(2), as an alien of 
exceptional ability in the sciences and as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. The 
petitioner seeks to employ the beneficiary as a civil engineer. The petitioner asserts that an exemption 
from the requirement of a job offer, and thus of a labor certification, is in the nati()nal interest of the 
United States. The director found that the beneficiary qualifies for classification as 11 member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree, but that the petitioner has not established that an exemption 
from the requirement of a job offer would be in the national interest of the United States. 
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) regulation at 8 c:.F.R. * 103.2(a)(2) 
provides: 
Signature. An applicant or petIlIoner must sign his or her application or petition. 
However, a parent or legal guardian may sign for a person who is less than 14 years 
old. A legal guardian may sign for a mentally incompetent person. By signing the 
application or petition, the applicant or petitioner, or parent or guardian certifies 
under penalty of perjury that the application or petition, and all evidence submitted 
with it, either at the time of filing or thereafter, is true and correct. Unless otherwise 
specified in this chapter, an acceptable signature on an application or petition that is 
being filed with the BCIS is one that is either handwritten or. for applications or 
petitions filed electronically as permitted by the instructions to the tlHtn, in electronic 
format. 
USCIS received the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, by electronic filing on March 
1,2011. Part 1 of the Form 1-140 identifies as the petitioner. In Part 8 of the 
Form 1-140. under "Petitioner's Signature," counsel signed and certified the petition 
electronically. The electronic signature on Form 1-140 is not that of the petitioner, as required by 
IOU""'" "', but instead that of the petitioner's attorney. In this instance, no employee or officer of 
Inc., signed or certified the Form 1-140. The only signatures on the form are that of 
counsel. USCIS regulations do not permit an individual other than the petitioner to sign Form 1-140. 
The Form 1-140 Instructions state: 
If the petitioner is an individual, then that individual, or that individual's legal 
guardian if he or she is incompetent or under 14 years of age, must personally sign 
the petition. If the petitioner is a corporation or other legal entity, only an individual 
who is an officer or employee of the entity who has knowledge of the facts alleged in 
the petition, and who has authority to sign documents on behalf of the entity, may 
sign the petition. 
Page 3 
There is no regulatory provision that waives the signature requirement for a petitioning U.S. 
employer or that permits a petitioning U.S. employer to designate an attorney or accredited 
representative to sign the petition on behalf of the U.S. empl~ance, the petition has 
not been properly filed because the petitioning U.S. employer, __ Inc., did not sign the 
petition. Under the USCIS regulation at 8 C.F.R. ~ 103.2(a)(7)(i), an application or petition which is 
not properly signed shall be rejected as improperly filed, and no receipt date can be assigned to an 
improperly filed petition. While the service center did not reject the petition, the ;\;\0 is not bound 
to follow the contradictory decision of a service center. LOllisialla l'hilharmollic ()rc!wslra v. INS, 
No. 98-2855, 200n WL 282785, * I, *3 (E.O. La.), affd, 248 F.3d 1139 (5th Cir. 200 I), Cf'rl. delliI'd, 
122 S.O. 51 (20(ll). 
In the present matter, counsel signed the Form 1-140 petition both on behalf of the petitioner and as 
the preparer. The signature line on the Form 1-140 for the petitioner provides that the petitioner is 
certifying, "under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America, that this 
petition and the evidence submitted with it are all true and correct." To be valid, 28 U.s.c. § 1746 
requires that declarations be "subscribed" by the declarant "as true under penalty of perjury." Id. In 
pertinent part, IX U.S.c. ~ 1621, which governs liability for perjury under federal law, mandates 
that: "Whoever in any declaration under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 
2X, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to 
be true is guilty of perjury." 18 U.S.c. § 1621. 
The probative force of a declaration subscribed under penalty of perjury derives from the signature 
of the declarant; one may not sign a declaration "for" another. Without the petitioner's actual 
signature as declarant, the declaration is completely robbed of any evidentiary force. See In re 
Rivera, 342 RR. 43S, 459 (D. N.J. 2006); Blumberg v. Gates, No. CY nO-OSfi07, 2003 WL 
22002739 (C.O.Cal.) (not selected for publication). 
The AAO notes that an entirely separate line exists on the Form 1-140 for the signature of the 
pre parer (Part 9) declaring that the form is "based on all infornlation of which rthe preparcr has I any 
knowledge" Thus, the Form 1-140 petition acknowledges that a preparer who is not the petitioner 
cannot attest to the contents of the petition and supporting evidence. Rather, the preparer may only 
declare that the information provided is all the information of which he or she has knowledge. 
Because the underlying petition was not properly filed with the petitioner's signature as required by 
the regulation at 8 C.F.R. ~ 103.2(a)(2), further action on the petition cannot be pursued, and the 
appeal must be rejected. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.