Date of Decision: September 24, 2018
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Logistics Management in Automobile Manufacturing
Beneficiary Information
Profession: Logistics Manager
Field: Logistics Management in Automobile Manufacturing
Nationality: [Not specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Sustained
Case Overview
The Petitioner, a manufacturer of electrical components for automobiles, sought to employ the Beneficiary as a Logistics Manager under the EB-1 classification for multinational executives or managers. This visa classification allows a U.S. employer to permanently transfer a qualified foreign employee to the United States to work in an executive or managerial capacity.
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary would be employed in a managerial or executive capacity in the United States. The Petitioner appealed this decision, arguing that the Beneficiary qualified as a personnel manager based on his supervision of a subordinate manager and his oversight of the logistics department. Upon de novo review, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) found in favor of the Petitioner and approved the appeal.
Key Issues
The primary issues in this case included:
Managerial Capacity of U.S. Employment: The Director determined that the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the Beneficiary would be employed in a managerial capacity in the United States. The initial evidence suggested that the Beneficiary might be involved in operational tasks rather than primarily focusing on managerial duties.
Vague Job Descriptions: The Petitioner’s job descriptions were initially found to be too broad and lacked specific details regarding the Beneficiary’s daily responsibilities, making it difficult to assess whether the role met the criteria for a managerial position.
USCIS Findings
The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) made several key findings:
Detailed Duty Descriptions: On appeal, the Petitioner provided a comprehensive and detailed duty description for the Beneficiary, which indicated that the Beneficiary would primarily be engaged in qualifying managerial tasks. These tasks included overseeing the company’s logistics department, which consisted of several employees, and managing a subordinate manager who, in turn, supervised five subordinates.
Supervisory Authority: The Petitioner demonstrated that the Beneficiary had the authority to hire, fire, and take other personnel actions concerning the members of his department, including the subordinate manager he oversees. This level of authority was a key factor in establishing the managerial nature of the role.
Relief from Operational Tasks: The evidence submitted by the Petitioner also showed that the Beneficiary would be relieved from performing non-qualifying operational tasks by the members of his logistics department, allowing him to focus on managerial responsibilities.
Supporting Evidence
Key evidence considered in this decision included:
Job Descriptions: The detailed job descriptions provided on appeal clearly outlined the managerial duties of the Beneficiary, demonstrating that he would be primarily engaged in overseeing the logistics department and managing personnel.
Organizational Structure: The organizational chart submitted by the Petitioner showed a clear hierarchy within the logistics department, with the Beneficiary overseeing a subordinate manager and several other employees, which supported the claim of a managerial capacity.
Personnel Authority: The Petitioner provided documentation of the Beneficiary’s authority over hiring, firing, and other personnel actions, which further established the managerial nature of the role.
Additional Notes
The AAO emphasized the importance of providing clear, detailed, and specific evidence when petitioning for an EB-1 classification. The Petitioner’s success in this case was largely due to the thorough and comprehensive documentation provided on appeal, which addressed all concerns raised in the initial denial.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was sustained. The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that the Beneficiary would be employed in a managerial capacity, qualifying him for the EB-1 classification for multinational executives or managers.
