dismissed L-1A Case: Network Security

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 20924197 
Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition forL-lA Manager or Executive 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAR. 25, 2022 
The Petitioner, a consultancy services company and reseller of network security products , seeks to 
continue the Beneficiary's temporary employment as director of operations under the L-1 A 
nonimmigrant classification for intracompany transferees. Immigration and Nationality Act 
section 101(a)(15)(L), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(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, as required, that the Beneficiary was employed abroad in a capacity that was managerial, 
executive, or involved specialized knowledge, and that the Beneficiary will be employed in the United 
States in a managerial or executive capacity . 
The Petitioner appealed the denial of the extension petition, and we dismissed that appeal in February 
2021, in a nine-page decision that addressed the merits of the petition and the Petitioner's assertions 
on appeal. The cover page for that appellate decision advised the Petitioner of its right to file a motion 
to reopen or reconsider, within a specified time period, under the regulations at 8 C.F.R. § 103 .5. 
In April 2021, the Petitioner filed an appeal to our February 2021 appellate decision. We rejected that 
appeal in August 2021 , because no provision exists to permit an appeal of an appellate decision. In 
that decision , we noted that the proper way to contest the dismissal of an appeal is via a motion, but 
the cover page to the rejection notice did not contain any reference to motion rights. 1 
The matter is now before us on a motion to reopen. We will dismiss the motion. 
1 Furthermore , a motion to reopen must include new facts andsupportingevidence. 8 C.F.R . § 103.5(a)(2). As we noted 
in our August 2021 rejection notice, the Petitioner 's April 2021 filing did not include any brief or evidence. As such , that 
filing would not have met the requirements ofa motion to reopen, even if the Petitioner had labeled that filing as a motion 
rather than an appeal. We note that the regulations make no provision to permit a petitioner to submit additional evidence 
to supplement a previously-filed motion . 
A petitioner's motion to reopen must be filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to 
reopen. 8 C.F.R. § 103.S(a)(l)(i). A motion that does not meet applicable requirements shall be 
dismissed. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). 
The motion does not seek to contest the rejection of the second appeal. Rather, on the Form I-290B, 
Notice of Appeal or Motion, the Petitioner specifies the "Date of the Adverse Decision" as 
"02/10/2021." In the accompanying brief, the Petitioner states: "This motion to reopen is written in 
response to the dismissal of an appeal ... dated February 10, 2021." Therefore, the Petitioner seeks 
review of our February 2021 dismissal of the Petitioner's original appeal. The motion was filed in 
September 2021, well outside the permitted period, even taking into account filing flexibilities in place 
at the time of our appellate decision. 2 
We may excuse untimely filings, in our discretion, if the petitioner demonstrates that the delay was 
reasonable and was beyond the petitioner's control. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.S(a)(l)(i). Here, the 
Petitioner's delay in filing the motion was neither reasonable nor beyond the Petitioner's control. Our 
February 2021 dismissal notice duly advised the Petitioner of its right to file a motion, and the deadline 
for doing so. We did not indicate that our appellate decision was appealable, and the Petitioner's 
attempt to pursue an appeal anyway did not pause orreset the limited period for filing a timely motion. 
Because the motion was untimely filed, with no showing that the delay was reasonable or beyond the 
Petitioner's control, we must dismiss the motion as required by 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). 
ORDER: The motion to reopen is dismissed. 
2 Those flexibilities allowed affected parties 60 days a ft er the issuance of an adverse decision to file appeals or motions. 
S ee http s :/ /www. u scis. go v/news/alerts/uscis-extends- flexibility- for-responding-to-agency-requests- 3 . 
2