Date of Decision: April 28, 2015
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Management, Operations, and Development
Beneficiary Information
Profession: Vice President
Field: Management, Operations, and Development
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Motion Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, a Kentucky corporation engaged in management, operations, and development, sought to employ the beneficiary as its Vice President under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The petitioner claimed to be an affiliate of the beneficiary’s former employer in India. The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary would be employed in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity in the United States. Additionally, the director found that the petitioner did not demonstrate a qualifying relationship between the U.S. entity and the foreign employer.
The petitioner appealed this decision to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO), which dismissed the appeal. The petitioner then filed a combined motion to reopen and reconsider the decision, which was also dismissed. The AAO determined that the petitioner did not present new facts or evidence sufficient to reopen the case or to warrant reconsideration of the prior decision.
Key Issues
The key issues on appeal and in the subsequent motion were whether the petitioner provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the beneficiary’s roles, both abroad and in the United States, were primarily managerial or executive in nature, and whether a qualifying relationship existed between the petitioner and the foreign employer.
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 that the beneficiary’s duties, both abroad and in the United States, were primarily managerial or executive in nature. Additionally, the petitioner did not resolve inconsistencies regarding the organizational structure and the qualifying relationship between the petitioner and the foreign entity.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted various documents, including tax returns, organizational charts, and a letter explaining the beneficiary’s medical condition. However, the AAO found these materials insufficient to overcome the deficiencies noted in the initial denial and the appeal.
Additional Notes
The AAO emphasized the importance of providing detailed and consistent 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 both the appeal and the motion.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The combined motion to reopen and reconsider was dismissed. The petitioner did not successfully establish that the beneficiary’s proposed duties in the United States would be 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
