Date of Decision: October 3, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Auto Parts Distribution
Petitioner Information
Profession: Managing Director
Field: Auto Parts Distribution
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Case Overview
The petitioner, an auto parts distributor, filed a petition seeking to permanently employ the beneficiary as its managing director under the EB-1 classification for multinational executives or managers. This classification allows a U.S. employer to transfer a qualified foreign employee to the United States to work in an executive or managerial capacity. The petition was initially denied by the Director of the Texas Service Center, leading to a combined motion to reopen and reconsider the decision.
Key Issues
The Director denied the petition on the grounds that the record did not sufficiently establish that the beneficiary was employed abroad in a managerial or executive capacity, nor did it prove that the petitioner would employ the beneficiary in such a capacity in the United States. Additionally, the motion to reopen was denied because it did not include new evidence that could establish the beneficiary’s eligibility, and the motion to reconsider was denied for failing to cite pertinent precedent decisions.
USCIS Findings
The USCIS found that the petitioner’s motion to reopen and reconsider did not meet the necessary requirements. The motion to reopen lacked new facts supported by documentary evidence, and the motion to reconsider failed to establish that the decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy. The Director’s decision noted that the job responsibilities provided were too broad and did not convey a clear understanding of the beneficiary’s daily activities. The Strategic Plan submitted did not convincingly demonstrate that the beneficiary’s role in the U.S. would primarily involve managerial or executive duties.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted an expanded description of the beneficiary’s foreign duties and a Strategic Plan detailing the scope of work in the U.S. position. However, the Director found these submissions inadequate. The new description did provide some insight into the beneficiary’s managerial capacity abroad, but it was not enough to alter the initial conclusions. The Strategic Plan was criticized for including non-managerial duties, which the Director felt undermined the claim that the beneficiary would be employed in a managerial or executive capacity in the United States.
Additional Notes
The Director’s decision on the motion to reopen and reconsider was found to be incomplete, as it did not fully address the merits of the combined motion. Specifically, the Director failed to elaborate on key findings, such as the presence of non-managerial duties in the beneficiary’s U.S. role and the incorrect assertion that the petitioner only cited non-precedent decisions. The case was remanded for further review, with instructions for the Director to consider the new evidence and legal arguments presented by the petitioner.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The decision was remanded for further review, as the initial findings by the Director were incomplete and did not fully address the merits of the case. The petitioner’s arguments and evidence warrant a more thorough examination before a final decision can be made.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
