dismissed L-1B Case: Information Technology

identifying data delete6\le
revent clearly U}ti'1~Xr~RtetiP . f ~'t,,\ prlvaev
invasion0 P~~_l' «, ,".1
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3000
Washington, DC 20529
u.S. Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
PUBUcCOpy
File: EAC 05 210 52187
IN RE: Petitioner:
Beneficia
Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: FEB 02 2.fJJ]
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:
SELF-REPRESENTED
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 .
.. -_..-~
.c.'-~:k __
L....-
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
EAC 05 21052187
Page 2
DISCUSSION: The Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the nonimmigrant visa petition and the
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected
pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(l).
The petitioner is allegedly engaged in the business of providing content supply chain solutions. The
petitioner seeks to employ the beneficiary as a systems administrator as an L-1B nonimmigrant intracompany
transferee having specialized knowledge pursuant to section 101(a)(l5)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(l5)(L). The director denied the petition after concluding that the petitioner
failed to establish that the beneficiary will be employed in a position involving specialized knowledge.
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2) requires an affected party to file the complete appeal within 30 days after
service of the decision, or, in accordance with 8 C.F.R. § 103.5a(b), within 33 days if the decision was served by
mail. The record indicates that the decision of the director was faxed to and received by the petitioner's
representative on Thursday, September 29,2005. The director used the fax number provided in the Form 1-907,
Request for Premium Processing Service. The petitioner filed an appeal with the Vermont Service Center on
Tuesday, November 1,2005,33 days after the decision was served by fax.
Thus, the appeal was not timely filed and must be rejected on these grounds pursuant to 8 C.F.R. §
103.3(a)(2)(v)(B)(1).
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 as described in 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2) or a motion to reconsider as described in 8 C.F.R.
§ 103.5(a)(3), 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.
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.