Date of Decision: January 30, 2020
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Business Management
Beneficiary Information
Profession: Executive Manager
Field: Business Management
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, a wholesale distributor, sought to permanently employ the beneficiary, an executive manager, in the United States under the EB-1C immigrant classification for multinational executives or managers. The company filed the petition seeking to classify the beneficiary as a multinational executive, intending to bring him to the U.S. to continue working in a managerial or executive capacity.
Key Issues
The key issues leading to the denial of the petition included the petitioner’s failure to demonstrate that it was “doing business” as required by the regulations, both at the time of filing and for at least one year prior. Additionally, the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary was employed in a managerial or executive capacity in his former position abroad or would be employed in such a capacity in the United States. The petitioner also failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove its ability to pay the beneficiary’s proffered wage.
USCIS Findings
The USCIS and the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) found that the petitioner did not meet the regulatory requirements for “doing business” as of the petition’s filing date and for one year prior. The petitioner’s failure to present detailed duty descriptions or substantial evidence for the beneficiary’s roles both abroad and in the U.S. led to the conclusion that the beneficiary’s duties were not managerial or executive. Furthermore, the petitioner was unable to prove its financial ability to pay the beneficiary’s wage as of the filing date.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner’s supporting evidence included IRS Form 1040 for the year 2015, which reflected income from the petitioner’s business activities. However, the evidence was insufficient as it did not demonstrate ongoing business activities up to and beyond the petition’s filing date in February 2017. The petitioner also submitted vague and generic descriptions of the beneficiary’s duties, which were deemed inadequate to substantiate the claimed managerial or executive roles.
Additional Notes
The petitioner’s acknowledgment of business inactivity in 2017 further weakened its case, raising doubts about its ability to support the beneficiary’s employment in the U.S. in a managerial or executive capacity. The petitioner’s failure to provide specific, verifiable evidence about its operations and the beneficiary’s role ultimately contributed to the dismissal of the appeal.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed due to the petitioner’s inability to meet the regulatory requirements for doing business, failure to establish the beneficiary’s managerial or executive capacity, and insufficient evidence of the ability to pay the proffered wage.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
