dismissed EB-3 Case: Unskilled Labor

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass, Rm., N.W., A3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
PUBLIC COPY 
Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: m'b 1 0 i?@6 
SRC 03 145 52461 
IN RE: 
PETITION: Immigrant petition for Alien Worker as an Other, Unskilled Worker pursuant to section 203(b)(3) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 3 1153(b)(3) 
ON 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. 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition. The matter 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. 6 103.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party 
must file the complete appeal within 30 days of after service of the unfavorable decision. If the decision was 
mailed, the appeal must be filed within 33 days. See 8 C.F.R. $ 103.5a(b). 
The record indicates that the director issued the decision on December 3, 2004. The director properly gave 
notice to the petitioner that it had 33 days to file the appeal. Although counsel dated the appeal1 January 4, 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) received the appeal on January 7,2005,36 days after the decision 
was issued.' Accordingly, the appeal was untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2) states that, if an untimely appeal meets the requirements of a 
motion to 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 service center director. See 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(l)(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. 
i 
 Counsel selected on the appeal form the statement that indicated that counsel would be submitting a brief or 
additional evidence within 30 days, however, none was submitted. Counsel's statement on appeal contains no 
specific assignment of error, or introduces new evidence relative to the issues raised in the statement of 
appeal. Alleging that the director erred in some unspecified way is an insufficient basis for an appeal. 8 
C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(l)(v) states, in pertinent part: "An officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily 
dismiss any appeal when the party concerned fails to identie specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or 
statement of fact for the appeal." Counsel has failed to identify specifically an erroneous conclusion of law or 
a statement of fact as a basis for the appeal. 
2 
The Texas had initially rejected the filing after its receipt on January 7,2005, but then accepted it on January 
20,2005. The January 7, 2005 filing was properly addressed, and, for purposes of this Order is considered 
the date of acceptance.