dismissed H-1B Case: Unknown

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clear iy ~wananted 
bv~ion of personal privacy 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: WAC 05 003 53780 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: AuG 0 7 2006 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(l S)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1 1 Ol(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. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 05 003 53780 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the nonimmigrant 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. § 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. 103.5a(b). 
The record indicates that the director issued the decision on March 30, 2005. It is noted that the director 
properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 33 days to file the appeal. The petitioner filed an appeal with 
the proper fee on May 3, 2005, or 34 days after the decision was issued. Accordingly, the appeal was 
untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ 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. 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.