Date of Decision: April 8, 2015
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Luxury Hotel Operations
Beneficiary Information
Profession: Residential Director of Outlets
Field: Luxury Hotel Operations
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, a multinational corporation operating luxury hotels worldwide, sought to employ the beneficiary in the United States as a Residential Director of Outlets under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition on January 17, 2014, finding that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary was employed abroad in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity.
On appeal, the petitioner disputed the director’s findings, submitting a supplemental brief that discussed the beneficiary’s previous position with the foreign employer, where he served as a Room Service Manager in Ireland, overseeing twelve employees, including assistant managers and subordinate supervisors.
Key Issues
The primary issue on appeal was whether the petitioner provided sufficient evidence to establish that the beneficiary’s role abroad was primarily managerial or executive in nature. The AAO found that there were inconsistencies between the job descriptions provided, particularly regarding the beneficiary’s role and duties as a Room Service Manager. The discrepancies between the organizational charts and job descriptions submitted by the petitioner further complicated the case.
USCIS Findings
The AAO determined that the petitioner did not meet the burden of proof required for the EB-1C classification. The petitioner failed to resolve inconsistencies in the record, including conflicting job descriptions and organizational charts. Additionally, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the beneficiary’s duties abroad were primarily managerial, as required by the EB-1C classification.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted various documents, including job descriptions, organizational charts, and a statement from the vice president of human resources. However, the AAO found these materials insufficient to address the inconsistencies noted by the director, particularly regarding the managerial or executive nature of the beneficiary’s role.
Additional Notes
The AAO emphasized the importance of providing clear, consistent, and detailed evidence to establish the managerial or executive nature of the beneficiary’s duties. The presence of discrepancies 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 abroad were primarily managerial or executive in nature.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
