Date of Decision: November 24, 2015
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Clothing Supplier
Beneficiary Information
Profession: Vice President
Field: Clothing Supplier
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, a Florida-based clothing supplier, sought to employ the beneficiary as its Vice President under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the beneficiary would be employed in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity in the United States. The Director also found inconsistencies in the evidence regarding the beneficiary’s employment abroad and the organizational structure of the U.S. entity.
The petitioner appealed the decision, but the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the Director’s findings. The AAO found that the petitioner failed to resolve the discrepancies in the beneficiary’s job title and duties both in the foreign and U.S. entities, and did not provide a clear and detailed description of the beneficiary’s executive role.
Key Issues
The key issue was whether the petitioner provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the beneficiary was employed in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity both abroad and in the United States. The AAO found that the petitioner’s evidence, including job descriptions and organizational charts, was vague and inconsistent, particularly concerning the beneficiary’s role in the U.S. entity. The petitioner also failed to resolve significant discrepancies regarding the beneficiary’s employment history abroad.
USCIS Findings
The AAO determined that the petitioner did not meet the burden of proof required to establish that the beneficiary was employed in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity. The inconsistencies in the record, particularly regarding the organizational structure and the beneficiary’s job duties, raised significant doubts about the credibility of the petitioner’s claims. The AAO emphasized the importance of providing clear, detailed, and consistent evidence in support of EB-1C petitions.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted job descriptions, organizational charts, and payroll records. However, the AAO found that this evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that the beneficiary’s role involved primarily managerial or executive duties. The discrepancies in the evidence, particularly regarding the beneficiary’s job title and responsibilities, further weakened the petitioner’s case.
Additional Notes
The AAO highlighted the need for petitioners to provide comprehensive and consistent documentation when seeking EB-1C classification. The petitioner’s failure to adequately document the beneficiary’s role and resolve inconsistencies in the record led to the dismissal of the appeal.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed. The petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary would be employed in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity in the United States, as required for the EB-1C classification.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
