Date of Decision: November 22, 2016
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Information Technology
Beneficiary Information
Profession: Information Technology Director
Field: Telecommunications Services
Nationality: Brazil
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Case Overview
The petitioner, a telecommunications services company, sought to employ the beneficiary as an Information Technology Director under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The company aimed to permanently transfer the beneficiary from their Brazil-based operations to the United States, where he was expected to oversee and manage the company’s IT functions. However, the initial petition was denied by the Texas Service Center on the grounds that the evidence did not sufficiently establish that the beneficiary would be employed in a managerial or executive capacity within the U.S.
Key Issues
The primary issue revolved around whether the petitioner had adequately demonstrated that the beneficiary would be performing in a managerial capacity as defined by U.S. immigration law. Specifically, the petitioner needed to prove that the beneficiary’s role in the U.S. involved managing the organization, supervising professional employees, and exercising discretion over day-to-day operations without being directly involved in operational tasks. The Director questioned the clarity and specificity of the beneficiary’s job duties and the organizational structure of the petitioner, which relied heavily on overseas operations.
USCIS Findings
USCIS found that the job description provided for the beneficiary in the United States lacked sufficient detail and included vague terms that did not clearly outline his managerial responsibilities. The evidence indicated that the beneficiary’s duties might include significant non-managerial tasks, which disqualified him from the managerial capacity required for EB-1C classification. Additionally, the petitioner failed to establish a qualifying relationship between the U.S. company and the foreign entity in Brazil, raising doubts about the legitimacy of the multinational structure claimed.
Supporting Evidence
Key evidence considered in this decision included the organizational charts, job descriptions, and vendor contracts provided by the petitioner. However, the evidence was deemed insufficient to substantiate the beneficiary’s managerial role, particularly in the U.S. context, where his direct reports were located in Brazil, and the U.S. operation had minimal staff. The petitioner also failed to adequately document the relationship between the U.S. entity and its Brazilian counterpart, which further weakened the case.
Additional Notes
USCIS noted procedural concerns regarding the Director’s use of stock language in the denial notice, but determined that this did not affect the outcome. The appeal emphasized that the petitioner’s small U.S. staff size did not inherently disqualify the beneficiary from the managerial role but failed to address how the beneficiary’s role met the statutory definition of managerial capacity.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the denial of the petition on multiple grounds, including the failure to prove the beneficiary’s managerial capacity and the lack of a qualifying relationship between the petitioner and the foreign entity.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
