dismissed O-1A Case: Unknown

'denti$ifying data deleted to 
Prevent clearly WW-~& 
kvwiclll ofpm~ priVBcy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
PUBLIC COPY 
5 
Ps 
k4 
FILE: SRC 05 800 23652 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: AUG 1 8 2ub 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonirnmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(0)(i) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 9 1 lOl(a)(lS)(O)(i) 
ON 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. 
$ Administrative Appeals Office 
SRC 05 800 23652 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the nonimmigrant visa petition in a decision dated 
March 15,2006. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will 
reject the appeal. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(l)(iii) states, in pertinent part: 
(B) Meaning of afictedparty. For purposes of this section and sections 103.4 and 103.5 
of this part, aflectedpaw (in addition to Citizenship and Immigration Services [CIS]) 
means the person or entity with legal standing in a proceeduzg. It does not include the 
beneficiary of a visa petition. 
Further, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103,3(a)(2)(v) states: 
Imprper&fiEed appeal - (A) Ap~lfled by person or entity not entitled to JiZe it - (I) 
Rejection without refind offiling fee. An appeal filed by a person or entity not entitled to 
file it must be rejected as improperly filed. In such a case, any fihg fee CIS has 
accepted will not be refimded. 
In this instance, the appeal was filed by attorney ~lthou~h indicates on the 
Form I-290B that he represents the petitioner and the beneficiary, the md contains no Form (3-28 indicating 
counsel's representation of the petitioner. The only Form G-28 noted in the record is dated April 14,2005, which 
contains the beneficiary's name in the "Name of Person Consenting" box. While counsel signed the Form 1-129 
indicating his preparation of the form, the preparation of this petition is not tantamount to filing notice of his 
appearance on behalf of the petitioner. See 8 C.F.R. 9 292.4(a). No Form G-28 was submitted on appeal. 
It is further noted that on July 24,2006 counsel was notified by facsimile that the record lacked the appropriate 
notice of representation. Although counsel was given the opportunity to remedy this deficiency, to date, no 
further submission has been received by counsel. 
-As it presently stands, the apped has not been filed by the petitioner, nor by any entity with legaf standing in 
the proceedling, but rather by counsel for the beneficiary, who personally signed the I-290B Notice of Appeal, 
and identified himself, rather than the petitioner, as the "Person Filing Appeal." While the director 
erroneously acknowledged counsel as representing the petitioner, we are not bound to perpetuate this error on 
appeal. An application or petition that fails to comply with the technical requirements of the law may be 
denied by the AAO even if the Service Center does not identify all of the grounds for denial in the initial 
decision See Spencer Ente~rises, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1025, 1043 (E.D. Cal. 2001), afd. 
345 F.3d 683 (9th Cir. 2003); see also Dor v. INS, 891 F.2d 997, 1002 n. 9 (2d Cir. 1989)(noting that the 
AAO reviews appeals on a de novo basis). 
As cited in the regulation above, the beneficiary is not considered to be an affected party. As the appeal was filed 
by counsel for the beneficiary and there is no evidence that counsel also represents the petitioner, the appeal has 
not been pr)operiy filed, and must be rejected, pursuant to the above regulations. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.