Date of Decision: February 14, 2023
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Child Care Center
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President
Field: Child Care Center
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, which operates a child care center, sought to employ the beneficiary as its president 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 had been employed abroad in a managerial or executive capacity, that the beneficiary would be employed in such a capacity in the United States, and that the petitioner had a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary’s foreign employer.
Key Issues
The Director’s denial was based on the lack of sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the beneficiary’s role abroad and in the U.S. met the criteria for managerial or executive capacity. The Director also questioned the petitioner’s ability to prove a qualifying relationship with the foreign entity. The petitioner argued that the beneficiary was employed in an executive capacity, but the job descriptions provided were too vague and included operational tasks inconsistent with executive-level responsibilities.
USCIS Findings
Upon de novo review, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) upheld the Director’s decision, agreeing that the petitioner did not provide detailed evidence to support the claim that the beneficiary’s duties abroad were primarily executive in nature. The AAO noted that the job description included general business functions that did not specifically relate to the operation of a construction company, and several of the listed tasks were more suited to a financial analyst rather than an executive.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner provided job descriptions and organizational information, but these did not sufficiently demonstrate the complexity of the organization or the executive nature of the beneficiary’s role. Additionally, the evidence did not adequately address the Director’s request for more details about the beneficiary’s subordinates and the company’s organizational structure during the relevant period.
Additional Notes
The AAO concluded that the petitioner failed to meet the burden of proof to establish the beneficiary’s executive capacity abroad, and therefore, did not address the other issues related to the U.S. employment and the qualifying relationship.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed. The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish the beneficiary’s qualifying executive role abroad.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
