EB-1C USCIS Appeal Review – President – Automobile Parts and Services Company – APR132017_01B4203

Date of Decision: April 13, 2017
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Automobile Parts and Services


Beneficiary Information

Profession: President
Field: Automobile Parts and Services
Nationality: Not Specified


Summary of Decision

Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Summarily Dismissed
Motion to Reopen Outcome: Denied as Untimely Filed


Case Overview

The petitioner, an automobile parts and services company, sought to permanently employ the beneficiary as its president under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, and the petitioner subsequently appealed the decision. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) summarily dismissed the appeal due to the petitioner’s failure to provide a brief or evidence supporting the appeal.

The petitioner then filed a motion to reopen the case. However, the motion was received 102 days after the service date of the unfavorable decision, far exceeding the 33-day filing deadline. As a result, the AAO denied the motion as untimely filed. Despite this, the AAO reopened the case on its own motion (sua sponte) and agreed to review the merits of the original appeal.


Key Issues

The primary issue was the timeliness of the motion to reopen. The AAO determined that the petitioner did not file the motion within the required 33-day period, leading to its denial as untimely.


USCIS Findings

The AAO found that the motion to reopen was filed 102 days after the service date of the initial unfavorable decision, which far exceeded the allowed timeframe. The AAO noted that the filing date is determined by the date USCIS receives the motion, not the date it was mailed.


Supporting Evidence

The petitioner did not provide any new evidence with the motion to reopen that could justify the delay. The motion was denied based on the untimely filing.


Additional Notes

The AAO emphasized the importance of adhering to filing deadlines and clarified that the timing of receipt by USCIS is crucial in determining the validity of a motion to reopen.


Conclusion

Final Determination: The motion to reopen was denied as untimely filed. However, the AAO reopened the appeal on its own motion and will review the merits in a separate decision.


Download the Full Petition Review Here


Emmanuel Uwakwe
Emmanuel Uwakwe

I studied Electrical and Electronics Engineering and have a huge passion for tech related stuff :)

Articles: 1548

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *