dismissed L-1A Case: Unknown

identifyingdatadeletedto
preventclearlyunw~ted
invasionofpersonalprMJC)'
PUBLICCOPf
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W., Rm. A3000
Washington, DC 20529
u.S. Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
File:
INRE:
SRC 06 130 52527
Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date:· MAY 0 12007
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)(l5)(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.
~~
Rob~~, Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
SRC 06130 52527
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.F.R. § 103.5a(b). In accordance with 8 C.F.R.
§ 103.2(a)(7)(i), an application received in a 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 July 28, 2006. It is noted that the director
properly gave notice to the petitioner that it had 33 days tofile the appeal. According to the date stamp on the
Form I-290B Notice of Appeal, it was received by CIS on Thursday, August 31, 2006, 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 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)(1)(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.