dismissed H-1B Case: Unknown

identirn aaba"de!eted 6 
prevent clexly unwamtnted 
invasian of'- privacy 
PUBClC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
IN RE: 
PETITION: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section IOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
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. 
EAC 05 108 53165 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the nonimmigrant visa petition and 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. 5 103.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party 
must file the complete appeal within 30 days after service of the unfavorable decision. If the decision was 
mailed, the appeal must be filed within 33 days. See 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5a(b). 
The record indicates that the director's decision was issued on September 7, 2005. It is noted that the director 
properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 33 days to file the appeal. The appeal was received by 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) on November 7, 2005 or 61 days after the decision was issued. 
The AAO notes that the appeal was originally received by CIS on October 7, 2005, but did not include a 
properly completed payment, and therefore was returned. An appeal is not considered properly filed unless it 
is signed and executed and accompanied by the requisite fee. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(a)(7)(i). 
 Accordingly, the 
appeal was untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 103.3(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.