Date of Decision: May 29, 2024
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Real Estate Asset Management
Beneficiary Information
Profession: Chief Asset Manager
Field: Real Estate Asset Management
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, a real estate asset management company, sought to employ the beneficiary as its Chief Asset Manager under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition on the grounds that the petitioner did not establish a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary’s foreign employer. Additionally, the appeal was dismissed after the AAO concluded that the petitioner failed to prove that the beneficiary would be employed in an executive capacity in the U.S.
Key Issues
The primary issues identified were the petitioner’s failure to establish a qualifying relationship between the U.S. and foreign employers and the inability to demonstrate that the beneficiary would be employed in an executive capacity in the U.S. The petitioner filed several motions to reopen and reconsider, all of which were dismissed due to insufficient evidence and failure to address previously noted deficiencies.
USCIS Findings
The USCIS Director and AAO determined that the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the beneficiary would be engaged primarily in executive duties in the U.S. The petitioner’s documentation failed to clarify how the beneficiary’s duties would meet the statutory definition of executive capacity, especially given the petitioner’s limited staffing at the time of filing. The AAO also highlighted the petitioner’s repeated failure to adequately address the issues raised in previous decisions, such as the beneficiary being the sole employee available to perform both managerial and operational tasks.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted copies of asset management agreements, affidavits, and email communications involving the beneficiary. However, the AAO found that these documents did not overcome the deficiencies in demonstrating the executive nature of the beneficiary’s role or the organizational capacity to support such a role.
Additional Notes
The AAO emphasized that simply holding a senior title is not sufficient to qualify for EB-1C status; the petitioner must demonstrate that the beneficiary’s role involves primarily executive functions. The motions to reopen and reconsider were dismissed due to the petitioner’s failure to provide new facts or demonstrate an incorrect application of law in the previous decisions.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motions to reopen and reconsider were dismissed. The petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary would be employed in an executive capacity, and the underlying petition remains denied.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
