dismissed H-1B Case: Education

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 5675628 
Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision 
Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : FEB. 19, 2020 
The Petitioner seeks to continue the temporary employment of the Beneficiary as a "group teacher" under 
the H-lB nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act 
(the Act) section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) , 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). 
The Vermont Service Center Director denied the petition , concluding that the record does not establish 
that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. We dismissed the subsequently filed 
appeal and dismissed the Petitioner 's subsequently filed motion to reopen . The Petitioner 
subsequently filed a motion to reconsider which we dismissed and then filed a second motion to 
reconsider which we also dismissed. The matter is now before us on a third motion to reconsider. We 
will dismiss the motion . 
To merit reopening or reconsideration, a petitioner must meet the formal filing requirements (such as, 
for instance , submission of a properly completed Form I-290B , Notice of Appeal or Motion , with the 
correct fee), and show proper cause for granting the motion. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l). 
The Petitioner has not filed a motion to reopen and does not state new facts supported by affidavits or 
other documentary evidence sufficient to satisfy the requirements of a motion to reopen . 8 C.F .R. 
§ 103.5(a)(2). Accordingly , we restrict our analysis to the requirements of a motion to reconsider. A 
motion to reconsider is based on legal grounds and must (1) state the reasons for reconsideration; (2) 
establish that the decision was based on an incorrect application oflaw or policy; and (3) establish that 
the decision was incorrect based on the evidence ofrecord at the time of the initial decision. 8 C.F.R . 
§ 103.5(a)(3). 
The previous decision on the second motion to reconsider was dismissed because the motion to 
reconsider was untimely filed. There is no provision in the regulations excusing an untimely filed 
motion to reconsider. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i). Moreover , the Petitioner does not assert that our 
decision was improper based on the evidence of the record. That is, the Petitioner does not state 
reasons for reconsideration and does not establish that the decision was incorrect based on an incorrect 
application oflaw or policy. Accordingly, the Petitioner has not established a legal basis to reconsider 
the previous decision. 
The Petitioner has not shown proper cause to reconsider the previous decision and has not otherwise 
established eligibility for the immigrant benefit sought. In visa petition proceedings, it is a petitioner's 
burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1361. The Petitioner has not met that burden. 
ORDER: The motion is reconsider is dismissed. 
2