dismissed
L-1A
dismissed L-1A Case: Unknown
Decision Summary
The appeal was rejected because it was filed untimely. The director's decision was issued on March 9, 2004, and the appeal was received 35 days later, which is outside the 33-day filing period allowed for mailed decisions.
Criteria Discussed
Timely Filing Of Appeal
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 20 Mass, Rm. A3042,425 I Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20529 U. S. Citizenship and Irnrnigration Services \* * ,// ? ' '?.?it File: SRC 02 108 5 1872 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: . ,iiLr,\ Petition: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. fj 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. kobert P. Wiernann, ~frector kxdministrative Appeals Office 11 ?d" SKC 02 108 5 1872 Page 2 DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the nonimmigrant visa petition on June 14,2002. On July 15, 2002, the petitioner filed a motion requesting reconsideration of that decision. The motion was dismissed by the director on March 9, 2004. 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. ยง 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. 5 103.5a(b). In accordance with 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(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 March 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 April 13, 2004, or 35 days after the decision was issued. Accordingly, the appeal was untimely filed. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(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.K. 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.
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.