Date of Decision: January 16, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Business Development
Beneficiary Information
Profession: Director of Business Development
Field: Business Development
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Case Overview
The petitioner, a beauty salon, sought to employ the beneficiary as a “Director of Business Development” under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The petition was intended to transfer the beneficiary from a foreign entity to a U.S.-based role in an executive or managerial capacity. However, the USCIS denied the petition, questioning the legitimacy of the beneficiary’s role abroad and the qualifications necessary for the EB-1C classification.
Key Issues
The primary issue identified was whether the beneficiary had been employed abroad in a managerial capacity, as required for the EB-1C classification. The petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence that the beneficiary was employed in a role that met the statutory definition of a “managerial capacity,” specifically failing to demonstrate that the beneficiary primarily managed an essential function or a team of professional employees. Additionally, issues were raised about the petitioner’s compliance with the one-year business operation requirement and the existence of a qualifying relationship between the U.S. petitioner and the foreign employer.
USCIS Findings
USCIS concluded that the petitioner did not provide adequate documentation to prove that the beneficiary’s previous employment met the managerial criteria. Despite multiple requests for a detailed job description, the petitioner repeated the same vague list of duties without specifying how much time was spent on each task. The USCIS also noted discrepancies in the petitioner’s claims about the relationship between the U.S. and foreign entities, further undermining the petition’s credibility.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted various documents, including organizational charts, job descriptions, and a resume. However, these materials failed to clearly define the beneficiary’s managerial role, instead highlighting their involvement in day-to-day operational tasks rather than strategic management. The evidence provided was insufficient to support the claim that the beneficiary managed an essential function or a team of professional employees.
Additional Notes
USCIS also found inconsistencies in the petitioner’s corporate documentation, such as the timing of business licenses and the incorporation date, which did not align with the required one-year period of operation. These discrepancies contributed to the decision to dismiss the appeal.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed due to the petitioner’s failure to establish that the beneficiary was employed in a managerial capacity abroad, among other significant deficiencies.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
