dismissed H-1B

dismissed H-1B Case: Unknown

📅 Date unknown 👤 Company 📂 Unknown

Decision Summary

The motion to reconsider was dismissed because it failed to satisfy the regulatory requirements. The petitioner did not state the reasons for reconsideration or provide support to establish that the previous decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy. Instead, the petitioner focused on why a previous untimely motion should be excused.

Criteria Discussed

Motion To Reconsider Requirements Timely Filing Of Motion

View Full Decision Text

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 24283206 
Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: DEC. 9, 2022 
The Petitioner seeks to employ the Beneficiary under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification for specialty 
occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). 
We incorporate by reference the procedural history within our most recent decision on the Petitioner's 
previous motion to reconsider; a decision we issued in July 2022. Within that decision, we dismissed 
the Petitioner's motion for their failure to satisfy the regulatory requirements for that type of motion. 
A motion to reconsider must: 
• State the reasons for reconsideration; 
• Be supported by any pertinent precedent decision to establish that the decision was based on 
an incorrect application of law or policy; and 
• Establish that the decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record at the time of the 
decision. 
8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). A motion to reconsider that does not satisfy these requirements must be 
dismissed. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). 
This motion filing has two shortcomings: (1) the Petitioner has again not met the filing requirements 
for a motion to reconsider bulleted above, and (2) it has not overcome the shortcomings we included 
in the July 2022 decision. Had the Petitioner satisfied items 1 and 2 listed above in this paragraph , 
only then may it address any issues that arose within a filing that preceded the July 2022 decision. 
Instead of addressing items 1 and 2 above, within this motion the Petitioner focuses on why their first 
motion filed in February 2021 should be excused even though they filed it after the regulatory 
prescribed period. 
Because they have not satisfied the basic requirements for a motion to reconsider, nor overcome the 
reasons within our July 2022 decision, we will dismiss this motion. 
ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed.

Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial

MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.

Avoid This in My Petition →

No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.