Date of Decision: September 26, 2017
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: International Trading Company
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President/Chief Executive Officer
Field: International Trading Company
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, an international trading company, sought to employ the beneficiary as its President/Chief Executive Officer (CEO) under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary would be employed in a managerial or executive capacity in the United States, and that she had been employed abroad in such a capacity for at least one year in the three years preceding her entry to the United States.
Key Issues
- Managerial or Executive Capacity in the U.S.: The Director found that the petitioner’s description of the beneficiary’s job duties in the U.S. was overly broad and lacked specificity, making it unclear whether the beneficiary’s role was primarily managerial or executive in nature. The petitioner also failed to provide a sufficiently detailed organizational chart, and the evidence suggested that the beneficiary would likely need to perform non-managerial tasks due to the small size of the company.
- Managerial or Executive Capacity Abroad: The petitioner claimed that the beneficiary had been employed abroad in an executive capacity. However, the Director found that the evidence provided was insufficient to establish this, particularly because the petitioner did not adequately document the beneficiary’s duties or the managerial hierarchy abroad. The Director also questioned the credibility of the beneficiary’s employment history due to inconsistencies in the provided documentation.
USCIS Findings
The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the Director’s findings. The AAO found that the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the beneficiary’s role in the U.S. would be primarily managerial or executive. Furthermore, the AAO found that the petitioner did not adequately prove the beneficiary’s qualifying employment abroad.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted job descriptions, organizational charts, and payroll records. However, the AAO determined that these documents were insufficient to establish that the beneficiary would be employed in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity.
Additional Notes
The AAO emphasized the importance of providing specific, detailed descriptions of the beneficiary’s duties, as well as clear evidence of the organizational structure and the roles of subordinate employees. The lack of detailed evidence led to 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 a managerial or executive capacity in the U.S. or that she had been employed abroad in such a capacity.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
