Date of Decision: April 7, 2015
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Education Consulting Services
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President
Field: Education Consulting Services
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Sustained
Case Overview
The petitioner, a Washington corporation that provides education consulting services, 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 on August 7, 2014, concluding that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary would be employed in the United States in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity.
The petitioner appealed the decision, arguing that the director did not sufficiently consider the detailed explanation of the beneficiary’s role within the U.S. entity. The petitioner provided a supplemental brief that addressed the director’s adverse findings, including a detailed explanation of the beneficiary’s duties and the roles of her support personnel. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) reviewed the appeal and found that the petitioner had successfully demonstrated that the beneficiary’s duties were primarily managerial or executive in nature, and the appeal was sustained.
Key Issues
The primary issue on appeal was whether the petitioner provided sufficient evidence to establish that the beneficiary would be employed in the United States in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity. The AAO found that the petitioner provided detailed job descriptions, evidence of support personnel, and documentation that sufficiently demonstrated the beneficiary’s executive role within the organization.
USCIS Findings
The AAO determined that the petitioner met the burden of proof required for the EB-1C classification. The evidence provided, including the detailed job descriptions and the organizational structure, demonstrated that the beneficiary would be employed in a qualifying executive capacity.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted various documents, including a detailed job description of the beneficiary’s daily schedule, organizational charts, payroll records, and tax returns. The AAO found these materials sufficient to establish that the beneficiary’s duties were primarily executive in nature.
Additional Notes
The AAO emphasized the importance of providing relevant and probative evidence to establish the executive nature of the beneficiary’s duties. The petitioner’s comprehensive documentation and clear delineation of the beneficiary’s responsibilities were crucial in sustaining the appeal.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was sustained. The petitioner successfully established that the beneficiary’s duties in the United States would be primarily executive in nature.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
