Date of Decision: DEC. 18, 2020
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Nonresidential Construction
Beneficiary Information
Profession: Executive Director
Field: Nonresidential Construction
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Case Overview
The petitioner, a nonresidential construction company based in Louisiana, sought to employ the beneficiary as an Executive Director under the EB-1C classification for multinational managers or executives. The petition was intended to secure permanent residence for the beneficiary based on their executive role. However, the case faced several challenges leading to its denial by the Texas Service Center.
Key Issues
The petition was denied on multiple grounds by the Texas Service Center. The primary issues identified included the petitioner’s failure to establish a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary’s foreign employer, inadequate evidence that the beneficiary had been employed in an executive capacity abroad, and the failure to demonstrate that the beneficiary would continue to hold a managerial or executive role in the United States. Additionally, the petitioner’s dissolution shortly after filing further undermined its eligibility as it could no longer offer a bona fide job.
USCIS Findings
The USCIS found that the petitioner did not meet the necessary requirements under the Immigration and Nationality Act, particularly those concerning the continuity of the managerial or executive role. The petitioner’s dissolution indicated the absence of an active U.S. entity capable of offering a legitimate employment opportunity, rendering the petition moot.
Supporting Evidence
Key evidence considered included the organizational structure of the petitioning company, employment records of the beneficiary, and the petitioner’s legal standing in the United States. The dissolution of the petitioner’s business was a significant factor in the decision, as it demonstrated that the petitioner was no longer a valid operating entity.
Additional Notes
The petitioner’s decision to dissolve the company shortly after filing the appeal played a critical role in the case’s outcome. This dissolution effectively negated the possibility of the petitioner fulfilling the necessary requirements to support the EB-1C petition.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed due to the petitioner’s failure to meet the regulatory requirements for the EB-1C classification, compounded by the dissolution of the petitioner’s business.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
