The Petitioner, an information technology (IT) entrepreneur, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement that is attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver of the required job offer, and thus of a labor certification, when it is in the national interest to do so.
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not establish: (1) the national importance of his proposed endeavor, and (2) that, on balance, the United States would benefit from waiving the job offer requirement. We dismissed a subsequent appeal. The matter is now before us on a motion to reconsider.
The Petitioner bears the burden ofproofto demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance ofthe evidence.
Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). Upon review, we will dismiss the motion.
A motion to reconsider must establish that our prior decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy and that the decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record of proceedings at the time of the decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). Our review on motion is limited to reviewing our latest decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(ii). We may grant motions that satisfy these requirements and demonstrate eligibility for the requested benefit.
Any motion to reconsider an action by the Service filed by an applicant or petitioner must be filed within 30 days ofthe decision that the motion seeks to reconsider. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i). A motion that does not meet applicable requirements shall be dismissed. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). The regulations make no provision for accepting an untimely filed motion to reconsider.
We dismissed the Petitioner's appeal on May 2, 2023. The Petitioner filed the present motion more than two months later, on July 5, 2023 . On motion, the Petitioner shows that he did not receive our dismissal notice at his overseas address until June 8, 2023, by which time the deadline for filing a motion had passed. The Petitioner asks that we therefore excuse the untimely filing of the motion, p. 2 although he cites no authority that would allow us to do so. The regulation at 8 C.F .R. § I 03 .5( a)( I )(i) gives us discretion to accept an untimely motion to reopen if the delay was reasonable and was beyond the petitioner's control, but there is no comparable provision for motions to reconsider.
The Petitioner has not established that we did not properly issue the appellate decision. Routine service consists of mailing the notice by ordinary mail addressed to the affected party and his or her attorney or representative ofrecord at his or her last known address. 8 C.F.R. § I 03.8(a)(l )(i). When we dismissed the Petitioner's appeal, we sent copies of the dismissal decision by regular mail to the Petitioner and to the Petitioner's then-attorney ofrecord, at the addresses provided for both. There is no evidence, and the Petitioner does not claim, that the attorney's copy was delayed or returned as undeliverable. Therefore, the record before us indicates that we properly issued the dismissal notice to the Petitioner's then-attorney ofrecord as well as the Petitioner.
Our appellate decision was properly mailed to the Petitioner's then-attorney of record as well as the Petitioner, and as noted above the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(1 )(i) does not allow us discretion to accept the untimely filing. Furthermore, the Petitioner has not established that our previous decision was based on an incoITect application oflaw or policy at the time we issued our decision. Therefore, the motion will be dismissed. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). 1
ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed.