Date of Decision: August 29, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Software, Services, and Internet Technology
Petitioner Information
Profession: Senior Technical Account Manager
Field: Software, Services, and Internet Technology
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Sustained
Case Overview
The petitioner, a company specializing in software, services, and internet technology, sought to permanently employ the beneficiary as a Senior Technical Account Manager under the EB-1 classification for multinational executives or managers. The Nebraska Service Center initially denied the petition on the grounds that the beneficiary’s role abroad did not meet the required definition of managerial or executive capacity. The petitioner appealed the decision, providing additional evidence and detailed explanations of the beneficiary’s duties.
Key Issues
Managerial Capacity Abroad: The Director initially denied the petition, concluding that the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the beneficiary had been employed abroad in a managerial or executive capacity. The role described appeared to involve significant non-managerial duties, which led to the denial.
Function Management: On appeal, the petitioner argued that the beneficiary served as a function manager, primarily managing the cloud services and sales solutions function for a key product within the company’s Latin American operations. The petitioner provided detailed evidence to support the claim that the beneficiary had delegated most of the administrative and operational tasks to subordinate professionals, thus primarily performing managerial duties.
USCIS Findings
Upon review, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) found that the petitioner successfully demonstrated that the beneficiary was more likely than not employed in a managerial capacity abroad. The AAO noted that while the beneficiary might have performed some non-managerial tasks, the totality of the evidence indicated that she exercised significant discretion over multiple teams of professionals and managed the direct provision of services to large-scale clients in Latin America. The petitioner’s detailed explanations and credible evidence convinced the AAO that the beneficiary’s role was consistent with the statutory definition of managerial capacity under U.S. immigration law.
Supporting Evidence
Duty Descriptions: The petitioner provided a revised duty description and a detailed letter outlining the beneficiary’s managerial responsibilities, including the delegation of non-qualifying tasks to subordinate employees.
Organizational Structure: The petitioner included detailed descriptions of the company’s organizational structure, demonstrating the beneficiary’s authority and the scope of her managerial duties across various teams in Latin America.
Discretionary Authority: The petitioner provided credible evidence that the beneficiary had discretionary authority over the day-to-day operations of programs and customer relationships, reinforcing her managerial role.
Additional Notes
The AAO emphasized the importance of a detailed and credible presentation of evidence when establishing a beneficiary’s managerial or executive capacity. The petitioner’s ability to clearly demonstrate the beneficiary’s high-level duties and the delegation of non-managerial tasks was crucial in overcoming the initial denial.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was sustained, and the petition was approved. The petitioner successfully established that the beneficiary was employed in a managerial capacity abroad, meeting the requirements for the EB-1 classification.
