AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision MAR022012_01B2203: Appeal timeliness

EB-1A appeal timeliness — AAO decision MAR022012_01B2203: Appeal rejected as untimely; returned to director for possible motion treatment. Review source…

Decision summary: AAO decision MAR022012_01B2203: Appeal rejected as untimely; returned to director for possible motion treatment. Decision issued July 29, 2010; Form I-290B dated Aug 30 but received Sept 2, 35 days later. AAO returned matter so director could assess whether late appeal satisfies reopening/reconsideration requirements.

Source limitation: The review record contains a source hold or limitation. Read the limitation below before relying on any case detail; unresolved facts are not treated as findings.

Scope classification from review: in_scope_EB1A_AAO_decision_precedent_status_not_marked_on_face. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.

Decision snapshot

Decision ID	MAR022012_01B2203
Decision date as printed	March 2, 2012
Classification / field stated in source	Not specified.
Procedural posture	Texas Service Center denial; appeal received 35 days after decision; AAO rejected as untimely and returned matter for director to assess motion requirements because late appeal brief was filed directly with AAO.
Operative disposition	Appeal rejected as untimely; returned to director for possible motion treatment.
Final-merits status	Not reached

What the AAO decision addressed

Decision issued July 29, 2010; Form I-290B dated Aug 30 but received Sept 2, 35 days later. AAO returned matter so director could assess whether late appeal satisfies reopening/reconsideration requirements.

Criterion-by-criterion status in this source

These labels reproduce the source-review record. “Not considered,” “not reached,” and “not coded” do not mean the criterion failed. A Director finding recited as background is not an AAO holding unless the decision says so.

Criterion	Source-review status
Awards	Not reached — source PDF
Membership	Not reached This AAO decision resolves filing, standing, jurisdiction, appeal specificity, or motion requirements; it does not decide any EB-1A criterion in the current decision. — source PDF
Published material about the person	Not reached — source PDF
Judging the work of others	Not reached This AAO decision resolves filing, standing, jurisdiction, appeal specificity, or motion requirements; it does not decide any EB-1A criterion in the current decision. — source PDF
Original contributions of major significance	Not reached This AAO decision resolves filing, standing, jurisdiction, appeal specificity, or motion requirements; it does not decide any EB-1A criterion in the current decision. — source PDF
Scholarly authorship	Not reached This AAO decision resolves filing, standing, jurisdiction, appeal specificity, or motion requirements; it does not decide any EB-1A criterion in the current decision. — source PDF
Artistic display or showcases	Not reached This AAO decision resolves filing, standing, jurisdiction, appeal specificity, or motion requirements; it does not decide any EB-1A criterion in the current decision. — source PDF
Leading or critical role	Not reached This AAO decision resolves filing, standing, jurisdiction, appeal specificity, or motion requirements; it does not decide any EB-1A criterion in the current decision. — source PDF
High salary or remuneration	Not reached This AAO decision resolves filing, standing, jurisdiction, appeal specificity, or motion requirements; it does not decide any EB-1A criterion in the current decision. — source PDF
Commercial success in the performing arts	Not reached This AAO decision resolves filing, standing, jurisdiction, appeal specificity, or motion requirements; it does not decide any EB-1A criterion in the current decision. — source PDF

Source holds and limits

status:

Specific caveats recorded by the reviewer

The AAO did not determine whether motion requirements were met or decide the petition.

Source-cited findings recorded in review

claim: Cover identifies March 2, 2012; Texas Service Center; EB-1A I-140.; pages: 1
claim: Director issued decision July 29, 2010 and provided 33 days for appeal; Form I-290B was received September 2, 35 days later.; pages: 2
claim: AAO rejected appeal as untimely; because supporting brief was filed directly with AAO and Director had not reviewed whether motion requirements were met, matter was returned for that assessment.; pages: 2
claim: If Director determines late appeal meets motion requirements, Director should grant motion and issue a new decision.; pages: 2

How this record may be used in research

Comparison scope: narrow_procedural_explainer_only

Page-level source trail

Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.

How to use this record

This is a historical, nonprecedent AAO decision about its own administrative record. It is not a prediction, success rate, or current filing instruction. Compare the issue and procedural stage before drawing an analogy. The current framework is in the USCIS Policy Manual, Volume 6, Part F, Chapter 2.

Related corpus research

Full-corpus research index
Membership research
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Artistic display or showcases research
Leading or critical role research
High salary or remuneration research
Commercial success in the performing arts research
Untimely research
Remand research

Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.

Primary source

Official USCIS AAO decision PDF for MAR022012_01B2203