dismissed L-1A Case: Not Specified

aentifving data deLetYed 
vent dearly unwamntec 
Pm 
 n of wrsonal orlvacv 
ind 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N. W., Rrn. A3000 
Wash~ngton. DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
File: WAC 02 155 5 1292 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: 
SEP 0 6 7Mfi 
Petition: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 101(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. 
A- 
". 
,J 
-- -_ 
/ --j 6 b 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 02 155 51292 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director of the California Service Center denied the nonimmigrant visa petition and the 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected as 
untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(l) requires an affected party to file the complete appeal within 30 
days after service of the decision, or, in accordance with 8 C.F.R. 3 103.5a(b), within 33 days if the decision was 
served by mail. The record indicates that the decision of the director was mailed to both the Petitioner and to its 
counsel of record on May 3 1, 2002. The record also indicates that the decision was personally served on counsel 
to the petitioner by facsimile on May 31, 2002. Counsel for the petitioner filed an appeal with the California 
Service Center on July 5,2002,35 days after the decision was mailed and faxed. Thus, the appeal was not timely 
filed and must be rejected. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(Z) states that, if an untimely appeal meets the requirements of a 
motion to reopen as described in 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(2) or a motion to reconsider as described in 8 C.F.R. 
tj 103.5(a)(3), the appeal must be treated as a motion, and a decision must be made on the merits of the case. The 
official having jurismction 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. 3 103.5(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 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.