Date of Decision: October 10, 2024
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Executives or Managers)
Field of Expertise: Automotive Repair Services
Beneficiary Information
Profession: General Manager
Field: Automotive Repair Services
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Motion Outcome: Motion to Reopen Denied
Appeal Outcome: Director’s Decision Withdrawn, Case Remanded
Case Overview
The petitioner, an automotive repair business, sought to employ the beneficiary as a general manager under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers.
The Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the petitioner failed to establish a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary’s foreign employer. The director also found that the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the foreign entity was still operating or that the beneficiary had been employed abroad in a managerial or executive capacity.
The petitioner filed a motion to reopen, which was denied. The matter was then appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office. Upon review, the Administrative Appeals Office determined that the director did not fully analyze all submitted evidence. As a result, the decision was withdrawn, and the case was remanded for further review.
Key Issues
The first issue was whether the petitioner had a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary’s foreign employer. The director determined that the petitioner did not provide sufficient documentation beyond stock certificates to establish ownership and control. The Administrative Appeals Office found that this conclusion was not fully supported, as the petitioner had submitted additional ownership records, including meeting minutes, a stock ledger, articles of incorporation, and tax returns. The director’s failure to consider these materials required further review.
The second issue was whether the foreign employer was still operating at the time of filing. The director stated that there was no evidence demonstrating continued business operations but did not analyze the foreign employer’s invoices and financial records. The Administrative Appeals Office determined that these materials needed further review before a final determination could be made.
The third issue was whether the beneficiary was employed abroad in a managerial or executive capacity. The director found that the petitioner submitted a generic job description that lacked details about the actual business operations abroad. Invoices bearing the beneficiary’s name suggested that he was directly involved in operational activities rather than performing high-level managerial or executive functions. The Administrative Appeals Office agreed that the petitioner did not provide sufficient detail regarding the beneficiary’s role abroad but instructed the director to allow the petitioner an opportunity to submit additional evidence.
USCIS Findings
The Administrative Appeals Office determined that the director’s decision did not fully evaluate the evidence in the record. Key findings included:
- The petitioner submitted stock certificates, meeting minutes, a stock ledger, articles of incorporation, and tax returns, which should have been considered in evaluating the qualifying relationship.
- The petitioner provided foreign employer invoices and financial documents demonstrating continued operations, which required further review.
- The job description for the beneficiary’s foreign employment lacked specificity, and additional evidence was needed to confirm whether the role was primarily managerial or executive.
- The director did not fully analyze whether the beneficiary’s duties met the statutory definitions of managerial or executive capacity.
Since the decision did not fully consider all relevant factors, the denial was withdrawn, and the case was remanded for further review. The Texas Service Center was instructed to issue a new decision that fully evaluates the petitioner’s claims and supporting evidence.
Supporting Evidence
- Stock certificates, corporate bylaws, and meeting minutes
- Stock ledger confirming ownership structure
- Financial documents, including tax returns and foreign business records
- Organizational chart detailing the beneficiary’s position and subordinates
- Payroll and operational records for the foreign employer
Additional Notes
The Administrative Appeals Office emphasized that adjudicators must thoroughly analyze all submitted evidence before issuing a decision. The petitioner’s documentation required a more detailed review, particularly concerning ownership and control of the U.S. and foreign entities.
Additionally, the decision reaffirmed that petitioners must provide clear, specific job descriptions when claiming a beneficiary worked abroad in a managerial or executive capacity. Generalized descriptions without supporting evidence may not be sufficient to meet the burden of proof.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The denial was withdrawn, and the case was remanded for further review.
Reasoning: The director’s decision did not fully consider all relevant evidence regarding the qualifying relationship, the continued operation of the foreign employer, and the beneficiary’s managerial or executive capacity. A new decision must include a comprehensive analysis of these factors.