Direct answer: AAO Procedure Research: Untimely appeals and motions: procedural decisions organizes source-reviewed AAO material around one research question and links readers to the underlying decision records.

This topic is a research lens across the source-reviewed corpus. Candidate keyword matches are discovery aids only; each linked record retains its own procedural stage and the exact issue decided. This page makes no claim that keyword matches are a validated cohort or a legal rule.

How the case examples were selected

The linked decisions are examples for topic discovery from the completed source-review matrix. They do not represent every matching record, prove a universal standard, or establish an approval probability. Open each source and compare the issue, evidence, date, and procedural stage.

Source-reviewed decision examples

• DEC052011_01B2203 — Appeal rejected.
  Procedural explainer on AAO jurisdiction, motion filing, and new evidence; no merits comparison. Official decision PDF.

• OCT112005_24B2203 — rejection of untimely appeal
  medium Official decision PDF.

• OCT212013_01B2203 — Motion to reopen dismissed as untimely and procedurally deficient.
  Procedural comparator for an untimely motion to reopen a withdrawn-appeal dismissal. Official decision PDF.

• AUG192005_04B2203 — Appeal rejected.
  Narrow deadline explainer; distinguish this 82-day late appeal, not converted, from other cases where motion-conversion requirements were met. Official decision PDF.

• JUN152020_01B2203 — summary dismissal; AAO agrees with general eligibility denial but no individual criterion findings stated
  medium Official decision PDF.

• APR072006_02B2203 — Motion rejected for lack of AAO jurisdiction.
  fit: Narrow procedure explainer on jurisdiction over motions after an untimely appeal was rejected without an AAO decision.; reason: Use only for the source’s page-cited procedural issue; no current criterion-level comparison is supported. Official decision PDF.

• JUL022024_02B2203 — Motion to reopen dismissed; motion to reconsider dismissed.
  Procedural comparator for attempts to appeal an AAO dismissal and successive motions with deadline/receipt issues. Official decision PDF.

• OCT262016_01B2203 — Motion to reopen or reconsider denied as untimely.
  fit: procedural motion deadline decision; nonprecedent; reason: Eligible only for a narrow procedural explanation of the motion deadline and date calculation described in this case. Official decision PDF.

• DEC032009_04B2203 — Appeal rejected as untimely; matter returned to director for consideration as a motion to reopen.
  fit: Procedural explainer on late appeal conversion to motion to reopen and service-center director jurisdiction.; reason: Use only for the source’s page-cited procedural issue; no current criterion-level comparison is supported. Official decision PDF.

• SEP142006_01B2203 — Appeal rejected.
  fit: exclude from EB-1A strategy; reason: Different statutory program and application type. Official decision PDF.

• FEB282013_02B2203 — Appeal rejected as untimely filed.
  Procedural comparison with 30/33-day deadline cases; do not present as merits review. Official decision PDF.

• FEB162012_02B2203 — Appeal rejected.
  Useful narrow explainer about both a new G-28 requirement for attorney-filed appeals and filing deadlines; do not suggest the missing G-28 alone was the timing basis. Official decision PDF.

• APR122018_01B2203 — Motion to reopen denied; motion to reconsider denied.
  Procedural comparator for successive filings, attempted appeal of AAO’s own decision, and an untimely motion with no new facts. Official decision PDF.

• JAN302008_01B2203 — Appeal rejected as untimely.
  Procedural comparator for a rejected late appeal with an incorrect fee and no basis for treating the submission as a motion. Official decision PDF.

• SEP082009_02B2203 — Appeal rejected as untimely; matter returned to director for consideration as motion to reopen.
  Procedural explainer on untimely appeals converted to motions; no case-outcome/criterion aggregation. Official decision PDF.

• JUL012016_01B2203 — Appeal summarily dismissed under 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v); no high-salary criterion merits determination was made.
  Procedural comparison only. Although the record names the high-salary criterion and Director’s evidence, it is not an AAO ruling on what establishes high salary. Nonprecedent. Official decision PDF.

• MAY152018_02B2203 — Motion to reopen denied; motion to reconsider denied.
  Procedural-only content on motions to reopen/reconsider, filing-date eligibility, and later evidence. Do not aggregate as a new first-instance criterion denial or appeal outcome. eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations

• AUG192005_12B2203 — Appeal rejected as untimely.
  Procedural comparison for an appeal received 82 days after denial, where the Director declined motion treatment. Official decision PDF.

AAO decisions are individual, nonprecedent records. Distinguish the Director’s findings, petitioner assertions, the AAO’s holding, remand directions, and any issue not reached. Historical decisions may apply an earlier legal framework; this research is not current filing advice.

Current framework and corrections

For the current regulatory framework, consult the USCIS Policy Manual. Read the source and corrections methodology before relying on an extracted summary.

Open the full AAO decision archive.