dismissed L-1A Case: Not Specified

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W.. Rm. A3042 
Washhgton, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
File: EAC 04 184 5 1761' Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: 
Petition: Petition for a Nonimrnigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1101(a)(15)(L) 
IN BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Director 7 Administrative Appeals Office 
EAC 04 184 51761 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the nonimmigrant visa petition. The matter is 
now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected as untimely 
filed. 
In order to properly file an appeal, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party 
must file the complete appeal within 30 days of service of the unfavorable decision. If the decision was 
mailed, the appeal must be filed within 33 days. See 8 C.F.R. 4 103.5a(b). In accordance with 8 C.F.R. 
tj 103.2(a)(7)(i), an application received in a Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) office shall be 
stamped to show the time and date of actual receipt, if it is properly signed, executed, and accompanied by the 
correct fee. For calculating the date of filing, the appeal shall be regarded as properly filed on the date that it 
is so stamped by the service center or district office. 
The record indicates that the director issued the decision on November 10, 2004. It is noted that the director 
properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 33 days to file the appeal. According to the date stamp on the 
Form I-290B Notice of Appeal, it was received by CIS on December 14, 2004, or 34 days after the decision 
was issued. Accordingly, the appeal was untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. tj 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2) states that, if an untimely appeal meets the requirements of a 
motion to reopen or a motion to reconsider, the appeal must be treated as a motion, and a decision must be 
made on the merits of the case. The official having jurisdiction over a motion is the official who made the 
last decision in the proceeding, in this case the service center director. See 8 C.F.R. tj 103.5(a)(l)(ii). The 
director declined to treat the late appeal as a motion and forwarded the matter to the AAO. 
As the appeal was untimely filed, the appeal must be rejected. 
Of note, the petitioner's new counsel has submitted a revised Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonirnrnigrant 
Worker. Counsel requests the amended petition to be reconsidered by the Service and in the alternative that 
the amended petition be considered by the AAO on appeal. However, counsel's request to amend the petition 
on appeal is not properly before the AAO. The regulations at 8 C.F.R. 214.2(1)(7)(i)(C) state: 
The petitioner shall file an amended petition, with fee, at the service center where the original 
petition was filed to reflect changes in approved relationshps, additional qualifying 
organizations under a blanket petition, change in capacity of employment (i.e. from a 
specialized knowledge position to a managerial position), or any information which would 
affect the beneficiary's eligibility under section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Act. 
The request to reconsider the amended petition on appeal is, therefore, also rejected. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.