dismissed H-1B Case: Unknown

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 19926511 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : AUG . 22, 2022 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary under the H-IB nonimmigrant 
classification for specialty occupations . See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 
10l(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. § 110l(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b) . The H-lB program allows a U.S. employer to 
temporarily employ a qualified foreign worker in a position that requires both (a) the theoretical and 
practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge and (b) the attainment of a bachelor's 
or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent) as a minimum prerequisite for entry into 
the position. 
The Nebraska Service Center Director approved the petition but denied the Beneficiary's request to 
extend his nonimmigrant status because the Petitioner did not file the petition before the expiration of 
the Beneficiary's status. Following that decision, the Petitioner filed a combined motion to reopen 
reconsider the denial of the Beneficiary's extension of H-lB status request. The Director denied the 
motions. 1 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence . 
Section 291 of the Act; Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). We review the 
questions in this matter de nova. See Matter of Christo 's Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537,537 n.2 (AAO 2015) . 
Upon de nova review, we will reject the appeal. 
Petitioners seeking H-lB status currently use one form to request a petition extension, extension of 
stay, and change of status. However, these are still separate determinations. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(l4) ; 
8 C.F.R. § 214.l(c); 8 C.F.R. § 248.3(a); 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(l5)(i). Thus, 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(14) 
deals only with H-lB petition extensions, 8 C.F.R . § 214.l(c) relates solely to extension of stay 
requests , and 8 C.F.R. § 248.3(a) addresses change of status requests to H-lB classification . There is 
no provision in the regulations for an appeal from a denial of an extension of stay request. See 8 C.F.R. 
1 We acknowledge the Director 's erroneous statement that the Petitioner could appeal the decision to our office. However, 
as discussed, we have no jurisdiction over the denial of an extension of stay request. 8 C.F.R. § 214. l(c)(S) ("Where an 
applicant or petitioner demonstrates eligibility for a requested extension, it may be granted at the discretion of USCIS. 
The denial of an application for extension of stay may not be appealed"). While we acknowledge the Director's error, it 
does not change the fact that we have no jurisdiction over this appeal. If the Petitioner desires the Director to reconsider 
its extension of stay request, the Petitioner must file a motion to the Director directly . 
§§ 214.l(c)(5), 248.3(g); see also DHS Delegation Number 0150.1 (effective March 1, 2003); 8 C.F.R. 
§ 2.1 (2003). 
The authority to adjudicate appeals is delegated to us by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS) pursuant to the authority vested in him through the Homeland Security Act 
of 2002, Pub. L. 107-296. See DHS Delegation Number 0150.1 (effective March 1, 2003); see also 
8 C.F.R. § 2.1 (2003). The regulations limit our jurisdiction over petitions for temporary workers to 
those described under 8 C.F.R. §§ 214.2 and 214.6. We therefore have no jurisdiction over this matter 
and consequently will address neither (1) the Director's determination regarding the Beneficiary's 
status, nor (2) the claims made on appeal contesting that determination. As there is no legal basis for 
our jurisdiction over the Petitioner's request, the appeal must be rejected. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected. 
2