Date of Decision: March 16, 2015
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Diamond Trading
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President
Field: Diamond Trading
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Approved, later Revoked
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, a New York corporation engaged in diamond trading, sought to employ the beneficiary as its President under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The petitioner claimed to be a subsidiary of a diamond trading company located in Belgium. Initially, the petition was approved, but the Director of the Texas Service Center issued a Notice of Intent to Revoke (NOIR) and later revoked the approval, citing the petitioner’s failure to establish that the beneficiary had been employed abroad in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity and that a qualifying relationship existed between the U.S. entity and the foreign employer.
The petitioner filed an appeal, providing additional evidence and arguments to support its case. However, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) dismissed the appeal, finding that the petitioner failed to overcome the deficiencies noted by the director.
Key Issues
The key issues on appeal were whether the petitioner provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the beneficiary was employed in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity with the foreign entity and whether a qualifying relationship existed between the U.S. entity and the foreign employer. The AAO found that the petitioner’s evidence was vague and lacked specific details regarding the beneficiary’s job duties and the organizational structure of the foreign entity. Additionally, inconsistencies in the petitioner’s submissions further weakened the case.
USCIS Findings
The AAO determined that the petitioner did not meet the burden of proof required for the EB-1C classification. The evidence provided was insufficient to establish the managerial or executive nature of the beneficiary’s duties with the foreign entity and the existence of a qualifying relationship between the U.S. and foreign companies.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted various documents, including job descriptions, organizational charts, and letters of support. However, the AAO found these materials insufficient to address the deficiencies noted by the director, particularly regarding the managerial or executive nature of the beneficiary’s role and the qualifying relationship between the entities.
Additional Notes
The AAO emphasized the importance of providing clear, consistent, and detailed evidence to establish eligibility for the EB-1C classification. The presence of inconsistencies and the lack of specific, reliable documentation contributed to the dismissal of the appeal.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed. The petitioner did not successfully establish that the beneficiary’s duties with the foreign entity were primarily managerial or executive in nature, nor did the petitioner demonstrate a qualifying relationship between the U.S. entity and the foreign employer.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
