dismissed L-1A Case: Fireworks And Safety Products

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: DEC. 20, 2023 In Re: 29426502 
Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (L-lA Manager or Executive) 
The Petitioner, a Ugandan company engaged in the sale of fireworks, fire prevention products, and 
medical and industrial gases, seeks to temporarily transfer the Beneficiary to the United States to serve 
as the chief operating officer of its new office I under the L-1 A nonimmigrant classification for 
intracompany transferees. Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(L), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 110l(a)(15)(L) . The L-lA classification allows a corporation or other legal entity (including its 
affiliate or subsidiary) to transfer a qualifying foreign employee to the United States to work 
temporarily in a managerial or executive capacity. 
The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the Petitioner's subsidiary had secured sufficient physical premises to house the new 
office and that the new office would support a managerial or executive position within one year. We 
dismissed a subsequent appeal. The matter is now before us on a motion to reopen. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). Upon review, we will dismiss the 
motion. 
A motion to reopen must state new facts and be supported by documentary evidence. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.5(a)(2). Our review on motion is limited to reviewing our latest decision. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.5(a)(l)(ii) . We may grant motions that satisfy these requirements and demonstrate eligibility 
for the requested benefit. See Matter of Coelho, 20 I&N Dec. 464, 473 (BIA 1992) (requiring that 
new evidence have the potential to change the outcome). 
A motion to reopen must be filed within 30 days of the decision, or 33 days if the decision is served 
by mail. 8 C.F.R. §§ 103.5(a)(l)(i) , 103.8(b). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) 
may, in its discretion, excuse the untimely filing of a motion to reopen where the record demonstrates 
that the delay was reasonable and beyond the control of the applicant. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
1 The pTpo sed U.S. employer is the Petitioner's subsidiary,_!_________ which was incorporated in 
Texas in 1 2022. 
I, 
We dismissed the Petitioner's appeal on January 30, 2023. The Petitioner filed this motion to reopen 
on July 18, 2023, 169 days after our decision was issued. Accordingly, the motion to reopen was 
untimely filed. 
On motion, the Petitioner contends that it never received our decision dismissing the appeal as an 
explanation for the untimeliness of the motion to reopen. Specifically, the Petitioner states that it has 
received no notices from USCIS despite mailing a Form AR-11, Alien's Change of Address Card, to 
USCIS several times. Because it asserts that it only recently learned of the appeal's dismissal from its 
former counsel, the Petitioner requests that we reopen the case and allow it "a fair opportunity to 
respond timely." 
Under 8 C.F.R. § 108.3(a)(l)(i), routine service consists of mailing the notice by ordinary mail 
addressed to the affected party and their attorney or representative of record at their last known 
address. Here, the Petitioner's last known address at the time our decision was issued was the mailing 
address provided on the Form 1-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion. Moreover, this address, as well 
the address of the Petitioner's counsel, was also set forth on the Form G-28, Notice of Entry of 
Appearance as Attorney or Accredited Representative submitted with the appeal. The record reflects 
that we mailed a copy of the decision to both the Petitioner and its counsel at their last known addresses 
set forth on these forms. 2 Further, USCIS records do not indicate that either copy of the decision was 
returned as undeliverable; therefore, the decision was properly served under 8 C.F.R. § 103.8(a)(l)(i) 
and 8 C.F.R. § 292.5. 
Absent persuasive evidence that the Petitioner sought to notify USCIS of a change of address prior to 
the issuance of the denial notice, the Petitioner has not met its burden to demonstrate that the delay in 
filing was reasonable and beyond its control. Accordingly, we have no basis to excuse the late filing 
of the motion to reopen under 8 C.F.R. § 103.S(a)(l)(i). Even ifwe were to exercise our discretion to 
excuse the untimely filing of this motion, the Petitioner has not satisfied the requirements for a motion 
to reopen because it does not state any new facts supported by documentary evidence that relate to our 
decision dismissing its appeal. Therefore, the motion will be dismissed. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). 
ORDER: The motion to reopen is dismissed. 
2 Despite the Petitioner's claim to the contrary, neither the record of proceedings nor USCIS records reflect that the 
Petitioner updated its address. 
2