Date of Decision: October 1, 2020
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Executive Management
Beneficiary Information
Profession: Executive
Field: Executive Management
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The Petitioner, an operator of a liquor store, sought to permanently employ the Beneficiary as an executive under the EB-1C classification for multinational managers or executives. The petition aimed to transfer the Beneficiary from a foreign company to a managerial or executive position within the U.S. organization.
Key Issues
The primary issue that led to the denial of the petition was the failure to establish that the Beneficiary would be employed in a managerial or executive capacity in the United States. Additionally, the Petitioner struggled to demonstrate the existence of a qualifying relationship between the U.S. employer and the foreign entity at the time of filing, especially since the foreign company was no longer operational.
USCIS Findings
The USCIS and the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) concluded that the Petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence to support the Beneficiary’s eligibility for the requested immigration benefit. The Petitioner did not meet the formal requirements for reopening the case, nor did it effectively challenge the legal rationale used in the prior decisions. Moreover, the USCIS emphasized that the foreign company’s closure disqualified the Beneficiary from the EB-1C classification, as a valid multinational relationship no longer existed.
Supporting Evidence
The Petitioner’s evidence included prior briefs and the Form I-290B, but no new affidavits or documentary evidence were presented. The lack of new supporting documents was a significant factor in the denial of the motion to reopen.
Additional Notes
The Petitioner contended that their previous appeal was improperly rejected; however, the USCIS confirmed that the appeal was correctly dismissed due to the agency’s lack of jurisdiction over appeals of its own decisions.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reopen and reconsider was dismissed, reaffirming the denial of the petition. The case underscores the importance of maintaining a qualifying multinational relationship throughout the petition process.
