dismissed L-1A Case: Unknown

identifying data deleted to
prevent dearly lmw~nted
,invasion ofpersonalpnvacy
PUBLlCCOp~
U.S. Department ofHomeland Security
, 20 Mass achusetts Ave. N.W., Rm. A3000
Washington, DC 20529
U.S.Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
File: SRC 05 250 51290 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: MAR 06:·,007 .
INRE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
Petition: Petition for a Nonimmigrant 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.
~m~;:-Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
SRC 05 25051290
Page 2
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas 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.P.R. § 103.5a(b). In accordance with 8 C.F .R.
§ 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.
Therecord indicates that the director issued the decision on December 27,2005. 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 Tuesday , January 31, 2006 , or 35 days after the
decision was issued. Accordingly, the appeal was untimely filed.
The regulation at 8 C.P.R. -§ 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(2) states that , if an untimely appeal meets the requirements ofa
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. § 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.