dismissed L-1A Case: Management

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8845845 
Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for L-lA Manager or Executive 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : WL Y 7, 2020 
The Petitioner seeks to continue employing the Beneficiary as its general manager under the L-lA 
nonimmigrant visa classification for intracompany managers or executives. Immigration and Nationality 
Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(L), 8 U.S.C . § 1101(a)(15)(L) . 
The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition, and we dismissed the Petitioner's 
appeal. See Matter of S-S- Inc., ID# 2040694 (AAO Mar. 21, 2019). We also dismissed the 
Petitioner's following motion to reopen as untimely. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 103.5(a)(l)(i), 103.8(b) 
(requiring filing of a motion to open within 33 days of the mailing of a challenged decision). 
The matter is before us again on the Petitioner's motion to reconsider. Upon review, we will dismiss 
the motion. 
I. MOTION CRITERIA 
A motion to reconsider must establish that our prior decision misapplied law or U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) policy based on the record at the time of the decision. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.5(a)(3). We may grant a motion that meets these criteria and establishes the approvability of 
the underlying petition. 
IL THE PETITIONER'S MOTION 
In part 2 of its current Form 1-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, the Petitioner marked box 1.c., 
indicating the company's filing of a "motion to reconsider." An attachment to the form also describes 
the filing as a "motion to reconsider." The motion asserts that the Petitioner timely filed its prior 
motion to reopen. The Petitioner bases its motion, however, on new evidence, not on the record at the 
time of our decision. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3) (stating that a motion to reconsider must be "based 
on the evidence ofrecord at the time of the initial decision"). The motion cites and includes copies of 
online information and email messages from the U.S. Postal Service to the Beneficiary, purportedly 
demonstrating the Petitioner's timely filing of the prior motion to reopen. 
Because the Petitioner does not base its motion on the record at the time of our prior decision, the 
filing does not meet the requirements of a motion to reconsider. We must therefore dismiss the motion. 
See 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4) (stating that "[a] motion that does not meet applicable requirements shall 
be dismissed"). 
Even if we could accept the current filing as a motion to reopen, which we cannot, it would not 
establish the Petitioner's timely filing of its prior motion. The emails and online information 
accompanying this motion would establish USCIS' initial receipt of the Petitioner's prior motion 
within 33 days of our appellate decision. But, to be properly filed, USCIS must receive a submission 
"at the location designated for filing such benefit request." 8 C.F.R. § 103.2 (a)(7)(i). Here, USCIS 
designated the filing of a motion seeking to reopen an AAO decision at a lockbox facility in Phoenix, 
Arizona. See USCIS, "Direct Filing Addresses for Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion," 
https://www.uscis.gov/i-290b-addresses (last visited June 5, 2020). The Petitioner's evidence, 
however, shows the filing of its prior motion at the California Service Center. Thus, contrary to the 
Petitioner's assertion, the record would not establish the company's timely filing of its prior motion 
to reopen. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The motion to reconsider does not establish our misapplication of law or USCIS policy, or the 
approvability of the underlying petition. 
ORDER: The motion is dismissed. 
2