dismissed
L-1A
dismissed L-1A Case: Unknown
Decision Summary
The appeal, which was treated as a motion, was dismissed because the petitioner's counsel formally withdrew it. The AAO also noted in a footnote that the motion would have been dismissed anyway for failing to meet procedural requirements, as it was not addressed to the proper office and failed to state new facts or cite an error of law.
Criteria Discussed
Motion To Reopen/Reconsider Requirements Under 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(A)(4) Addressing The Motion To The Official Having Jurisdiction Per 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(A)(L)(Iii)(D) Stating New Facts For A Motion To Reopen Per 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(A)(2) Demonstrating An Error Of Law For A Motion To Reconsider Per 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(A)(3)
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
identieing data deleted to prevent clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy I mCIC COPY U.S. Department of Homeland Security 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. A3000 Wash~ngton, DC 20529 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration File: EAC 0 1 263 5 1342 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: 2 3 2006 Petition: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(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. DISCUSSION: The nonimmigrant visa petition was denied by the director, Vermont Service Center. The matter was appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO), and the AAO dismissed the appeal on April 11, 2003. On May 9, 2003, the petitioner filed an appeal addressed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). Since jurisdiction lies with the AAO and not with the BIA, the matter was directed to the AAO where it was treated as a motion to reopen or reconsider. On September 22, 2006, counsel for the petitioner requested that the appeal, considered to be a motion, be withdrawn.' ORDER: The appeal, considered to be a motion, is dismissed based on its withdrawal by counsel. - fa=--- -. ~obe-rnann, Chief Administrative Appeals Office 'It should be noted that, had the appeallmotion not been withdrawn, it would have been dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 9 103.5(a)(4) for failure to meet applicable requirements. Not only is the appeallmotion not addressed to the official having jurisdiction as required by 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(l)(iii)(D), but it does not state any new facts or indicate that the AAO made an error of law as required by 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(2) and (3).
Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial
MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.
Avoid This in My Petition →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.