dismissed L-1A Case: General Merchandise Wholesale

idemiibrifig g>-a dcictcd to 
prevent c!eilrly un-~taxanied 
invasion of prssnal privacj 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
MAIL STOP 2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: EAC 03 165 50593 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: NflV 2 5 B& 
PETITION: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10I(a)(l5)(L) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 101 (a)(15)(L) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Ofice in your case. All documents have been returned 
to the ofice that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
flohn F. Grissom, Acting Chief 
Administrative Appeals Ofice 
EAC 03 165 50593 
q Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the petition for a nonimmigrant visa. 
After summarily dismissing the petitioner's appeal, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) granted a 
motion to reopen and aff~rmed its previous decision to dismiss the appeal. Subsequently, the petitioner 
appealed the AAO's decision, and the appeal was rejected as improperly filed. A subsequent motion to 
reopen was dismissed by the AAO, and the matter is now once again before the AAO on appeal. The 
appeal will be rejected. 
The petitioner seeks to extend the employment of the beneficiary as its vice president as an L-1A 
nonimmigrant intracompany transferee pursuant to 8 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(L). The petitioner, a corporation organized under the laws of the State of New 
Jersey, claims to be engaged in the wholesale of general merchandise and states that it is a subsidiary of 
M.R. Utensils, located in Ahmedabad, India. The beneficiary was initially granted a one-year period of 
stay in the United States in order to open a new office, and the petitioner now seeks to extend the 
beneficiary's stay. 
The director denied the petition on February 24, 2004, concluding that the petitioner failed to establish 
that that the beneficiary would be employed in a primarily managerial or executive capacity under the 
extended petition. The AAO dismissed the petitioner's appeal and affirmed its decision in a subsequent 
motion to reopen, in a decision dated May 17, 2007. The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal on June 
14, 2007, which was rejected by the AAO, which noted that the AAO does not exercise appellate 
jurisdiction over AAO decisions. In its decision dated December 4, 2007, the AAO reviewed the 
petitioner's appeal and found that it did not meet the requirements for a motion to reopen or reconsider. 
A subsequent motion, filed on January 4, 2008, was reviewed by the AAO and dismissed in a decision 
dated July 7, 2008. 
The matter is now again before the AAO on appeal. The petitioner indicated on Form I-290B that it 
would submit a brief and/or additional evidence to the AAO within 90 days. 
The petitioner's appeal will be rejected. As previously stated in the AAO's decision dated December 4, 
2007, the AAO does not exercise appellate jurisdiction over AAO decisions. The AAO exercises 
appellate jurisdiction over the matters described at 8 C.F.R. 4 103.l(f)(3)(iii) (as in effect on February 28, 
2003). See DHS Delegation Number 0150.1; 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(iv). Accordingly, the appeal is not 
properly before the AAO. 
Furthermore, upon review of the petitioner's brief statement on Form I-290B, it is apparent that the 
appeal does not meet the requirements of a motion as set forth in 8 C.F.R. 8 103.5. The petitioner states on 
Fonn I-290B: "The appeal is preferred, being aggrieved in fact - cursory review, ignoring facts on record 
AND in law - ignoring previous AAO decisions, ignoring equity, abuse of discretion & OTHER. A brief 
detailing all these issues will be submitted for your consideration in 90 days time which please grant." 
Although the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 8 103.3(a)(2)(vii) states that a petitioner may be permitted additional time 
to submit a brief or additional evidence to the AAO in connection with an appeal, no such provision applies 
to a motion to reopen or reconsider. The additional evidence must comprise the motion. See 8 C.F.R. $8 
103.5(a)(2) and (3). 
EAC b3 165 50593 
Page 3 
As the appeal was not properly filed, it will be rejected. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(l). 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.