Date of Decision: November 30, 2023
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Warehousing and Logistics Services
Beneficiary Information
Profession: General Manager
Field: Warehousing and Logistics Services
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, a warehousing and logistics services company, sought to employ the beneficiary as its General Manager under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary would be employed in the United States in an executive capacity. The petitioner appealed the decision, but the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) dismissed the appeal.
Key Issues
The Director’s denial was based on the following findings:
- Lack of Executive Capacity: The Director concluded that the petitioner did not demonstrate that the beneficiary’s role in the U.S. would primarily involve executive duties. The job descriptions provided were found to be vague and lacking in specific details that could clearly establish the beneficiary’s executive responsibilities. The Director noted that the description of duties failed to distinguish between the beneficiary’s roles with the petitioner and its parent company, further complicating the assessment of the beneficiary’s duties.
- Insufficient Organizational Structure: The petitioner failed to provide adequate evidence of a complex organizational structure that would support the beneficiary’s role as an executive. The petitioner claimed to employ 10 individuals at the time of filing, but the evidence provided, including payroll records and organizational charts, was inconsistent. The petitioner did not clearly establish how many employees were working directly for the U.S. entity, as some employees were listed under the parent company rather than the petitioner itself.
- Inadequate Staffing: The Director noted that the petitioner did not demonstrate that it had sufficient subordinate staff to relieve the beneficiary from performing non-qualifying operational duties. The evidence submitted did not support the claim that the beneficiary would be primarily engaged in executive-level tasks, as the petitioner did not provide a clear and consistent account of its staffing levels and the distribution of responsibilities.
USCIS Findings
Upon de novo review, the AAO upheld the Director’s decision, agreeing that the petitioner did not meet the burden of proof required for the EB-1C classification. The AAO found that the petitioner’s job descriptions and organizational charts were insufficiently detailed to demonstrate that the beneficiary’s role would primarily involve executive duties. Additionally, the AAO highlighted that the petitioner’s inconsistent evidence regarding staffing levels and the organizational structure further undermined the credibility of the petition.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted job descriptions, organizational charts, IRS Forms 941, and W-2 forms. However, the AAO found that these documents were inconsistent and did not provide a clear picture of the beneficiary’s executive role or the company’s ability to support such a position.
Additional Notes
The AAO emphasized the importance of providing clear, detailed, and consistent evidence to support claims of executive capacity. The discrepancies in the petitioner’s submissions and the lack of a sufficiently complex organizational structure were significant factors in the dismissal of the appeal.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed. The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that the beneficiary would be employed in an executive capacity as required for the EB-1C classification.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
