Date of Decision: May 9, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: School Bus and Shuttle Services
Beneficiary Information
Profession: Operator Manager
Field: School Bus and Shuttle Services
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, a school bus and shuttle services company, sought to employ the beneficiary as an operator manager under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition on multiple grounds, including the failure to establish a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary’s foreign employer, the beneficiary’s qualifying employment abroad, and the proposed managerial or executive role in the United States. Additionally, the Director made a finding of willful misrepresentation of material facts against both the petitioner and the beneficiary. The petitioner subsequently appealed the decision but later requested to withdraw the appeal.
Key Issues
The Director identified several key issues in denying the petition:
- The petitioner did not establish a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary’s foreign employer.
- The beneficiary did not meet the requirement of being employed abroad in a managerial or executive capacity for at least one year within the three years prior to filing the petition.
- The petitioner failed to demonstrate that the beneficiary would be employed in the U.S. in a managerial or executive capacity.
- The petitioner could not prove the ability to pay the beneficiary’s proffered wage.
- The petitioner and its foreign affiliate had not been doing business as required.
Additionally, the Director entered a finding of willful misrepresentation of material facts, highlighting discrepancies in the petitioner’s organizational structure, the beneficiary’s employment history, and the lack of a legitimate business operation.
USCIS Findings
Upon appeal, the petitioner requested to withdraw the filing. The AAO granted the withdrawal but upheld the Director’s findings, affirming that the petitioner and beneficiary willfully misrepresented material facts. The AAO noted that the petitioner failed to respond to the Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) and that the appeal lacked substantive arguments to address the identified issues.
Supporting Evidence
The Director’s decision was based on the petitioner’s corporate documentation, the beneficiary’s personal tax returns, and statements signed by the beneficiary. These documents were found to contain inconsistencies and lacked the necessary evidence to establish the petitioner’s eligibility under the EB-1C classification.
Additional Notes
The AAO concluded that the petitioner’s actions met the criteria for willful misrepresentation of material facts, which could have serious consequences for the beneficiary in any future immigration proceedings.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed based on its withdrawal by the petitioner. The finding of willful misrepresentation of material facts against the petitioner and beneficiary was upheld.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
