dismissed EB-3

dismissed EB-3 Case: Facilities Management

๐Ÿ“… Date unknown ๐Ÿ‘ค Company ๐Ÿ“‚ Facilities Management

Decision Summary

The appeal was rejected because it was filed by the Beneficiary, not the Petitioner. Under 8 C.F.R. ยง 103.3, the beneficiary of a visa petition is not considered an "affected party" with legal standing to file an appeal, and thus the appeal was improperly filed.

Criteria Discussed

Standing To File Appeal Affected Party Definition

Sign up free to download the original PDF

View Full Decision Text
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8846243 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Skilled Worker 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: SEPT. 3, 2020 
The Petitioner sought to employ the Beneficiary as a facility manager under the third-preference, 
immigrant classification for skilled workers. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 
203(b)(3)(A)(i), 8 U.S.C. ยง 1153(b)(3)(A)(i). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
Petitioner did not demonstrate the Beneficiary's possession of the minimum experience required for 
the offered position. 1 
The Beneficiary seeks to appeal the decision. The Beneficiary signed the Form l-290B, Notice of 
Appeal, and Form G-28, Notice of Appearance, authorizing counsel to represent him. The record does 
not indicate the Petitioner's authorization of the filing. 
Only affected parties, however, may file appeals. 8 C.F.R. ยง 103.3(a)(2)(i) (stating that "[t]he affected 
party must submit an appeal"). The term "affected party" means "the person or entity with legal 
standing in a proceeding. It does not include the beneficiary of a visa petition." 8 C.F.R. 
ยง 103.3(a)(l)(iii)(B). 2 
"An appeal filed by a person or entity not entitled to file it must be rejected as improperly filed." 
8 C.F.R. ยง 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(l). We will therefore reject the appeal as improperly filed . 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected. 
1 The Director also found that the Beneficiary willfully misrepresented his claimed, qualifying experience on the 
accompanying certification from the U.S. Department of Labor. The director stated in his decision, "[T]his finding of 
willful misrepresentation of a material fact shall be considered in any future proceeding where admissibility is an issue." 
Visa petition proceedings, however, are not the proper fora for deciding substantive issues of inadmissibility. Matter of 
0-, 8 l&N Dec. 295, 297 (BIA 1959). 
2 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services treats beneficiaries in petition revocation proceedings as affected parties if 
they qualify to "port" under section 2040) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 11540) , and have properly requested to do so. Matter of 
V-S-G- Inc., Adopted Decision 2017-06 (AAO Nov. 11, 2017). These are not petition revocation proceedings, however, 
nor does the record indicate the Beneficiary's qualifications to port or his request to do so. 
Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial

MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.

Avoid This in My Petition →

No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.