This is an AAO appeal decision — a case denied once and appealed. It shows how the framework is applied; it is not the filing population.
The decision does not describe the underlying proposed endeavor; it addresses only the timeliness of a combined motion to reopen and reconsider a prior appeal dismissal.
How the evidence was treated
- motion resubmission · discounted
“the Petitioner did not send the motion to the filing address designated in accordance with the form instructions”
AAO decision text
This record is one of thousands, each coded for the reasons it turned. A placement shows where your profile sits in that record, not what it predicts. See where your profile sits — 90 seconds →
Notable
This decision does not reach the merits of the NIW petition at all. It is a purely procedural dismissal of a combined motion to reopen/reconsider a prior appeal dismissal, decided solely on timeliness: the motion to reconsider was untimely by statute with no waiver authority, and the motion to reopen's untimeliness (one day late, attributed to a failed courier delivery) was not excused because the Petitioner mailed the motion to the wrong lockbox (Dallas instead of the designated Phoenix Lockbox for Texas Service Center matters), so the correctly-addressed filing arrived after the deadline regardless of the courier issue.
Authorities this decision leans on
From the doctrinal survivor set — 187 authority tests across 47 distinct authorities cleared the differential-lift gates. Only those appear here.
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(1)(i)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(1)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Motion was untimely: petitioner mailed to wrong USCIS lockbox (Dallas instead of Phoenix per form instructions), causing receipt at correct location one day after the 33-day deadline; error not excusable for motion to reconsider and not shown reasonable/beyond control for motion to reopen.
Strictly follow Form I-290B filing-location instructions matching the original decision-making office; courier/address mistakes are not excusable delay, especially for motions to reconsider.
vague
mixed
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an aircraft mechanic and instructor, proposed to enhance aviation maintenance training programs, support
- The Petitioner seeks EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with a national inter
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, but the substance of the proposed e
- The Beneficiary, sponsored by a private airline, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability in a
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; the sp