dismissed L-1A Case: Unknown

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass Ave., N.W.. Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
File: WAC 04 146 52871 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: JEC 2 2 1110,5 
Petition: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(I 5)(L) of the Immigration 
I 
and Nattonality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 10 1 (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. 
t.. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 04 146 5287 1 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California Service Center, denied the nonimtnigrant visa petition. The matter 
is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal.' The appeal wilt be rejected as untimely 
filed. 
In order to properly file an appeal, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(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. $ 103.5a(b). In accordance with 8 C.F.R. 
103.2(a)(7)(i), an application received in an office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) 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 December 9, 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 Wednesday, January 12,2005, or 34 days after the 
decision was issued. Accordingly, the appeal was untimely filed. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ 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. 5 103.5(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. 
I The AAO notes that the record in this proceeding contains a letter from counsel expressing confusion 
regarding a CIS decision dated February 22, 2005 relating to an 1- 129 L-1 A petition (LIN 03 120 52499) filed 
by the same petitioner for the same beneficiary. CIS records show that the petition in question was initially 
approved on April 29, 2003 and later revoked on February 22, 2005. Any decision or notice reIating to that 
petition was sent to counsel of record for that petition, the Law Offices of Kameli & Associates. The AAO is 
unable to provide counsel with copies of any notice or decision relating to the LIN 03 120 52499 petition as 
the record for that proceeding is not presently before the AAO. It must be emphasized that each petition 
filing is a separate proceeding with a separate record. See 8 C.F.R. 9 103.8(d). The AAO has forwarded 
counsel's query to the Nebraska Service Center for action. However, it is recommended that counsel once 
again contact the Nebraska Service Center directly with any request relating to the record in that proceeding.