dismissed H-1B Case: Unknown

idenwing data deletea to 
pmv-t clearly unwarranted 
in*m ofoersoapl ~rfvac. 
p~mc COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: WAC 04 140 52201 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: ApR 1 2 2006 
PETITION: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 l (a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 9 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) 
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. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 04 140 52201 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The petitioner filed a Form 1-129 petition for continuation of previously approved employment 
without change, and requesting an extension of stay, on April 29, 2004. The director entered a decision on June 
18, 2004 approving the HlB visa petition and denying the petitioner's request for extension of stay because the 
beneficiary's status lapsed prior to the filing of the petition. The petitioner filed an appeal of that determination 
stating that the petition was filed late due to ineffective assistance of previous counsel. The appeal will be 
rejected as there is no decision of the director denying a petition that is within the jurisdiction of the 
Administrative Appeals Off~ce (AAO). 
The petitioner is seeking an extension of status on behalf of the beneficiary under 8 C.F.R. 5 2 14.1 (c)( 1). The 
director's denial of the petitioner's request for an extension of status is not subject to appeal. 8 C.F.R. 
$ 214.1(~)(5). Thus, the AAO has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of this appeal. 
It should be further noted that the petitioner alleges ineffective assistance of previous counsel as grounds for 
appealing the director's decision. Any appeal or motion based upon a claim of ineffective assistance of 
counsel requires: (1) that the claim be supported by an affidavit of the allegedly aggrieved respondent setting 
forth in detail the agreement that was entered into with counsel with respect to the actions to be taken and 
what representations counsel did or did not make to the respondent in this regard, (2) that counsel whose 
integrity or competence is being impugned be informed of the allegations leveled against him and be given an 
opportunity to respond, and (3) that the appeal or motion reflect whether a complaint has been filed with 
appropriate disciplinary authorities with respect to any violation of counsel's ethical or legal responsibilities, 
and if not, why not. Matter of Lozado, 19 I&N Dec. 637 (BIA 1988), afd, 857 F.2d 10 (1" Cir. 1988). 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.