EB-1C USCIS Appeal Review – Marketing Manager – MAR212019_04B4203

Date of Decision: March 21, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Marketing Management


Beneficiary Information

Profession: Marketing Manager
Field: Marketing Management
Nationality: Not Specified


Summary of Decision

Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed


Case Overview

The petitioner, a steel dealer based in the United States, sought to employ the beneficiary, a foreign national, as a Marketing Manager under the EB-1C immigrant classification for multinational executives or managers. This classification allows a U.S. employer to permanently transfer a qualified foreign employee to the United States to work in an executive or managerial capacity.

Key Issues

The primary issues leading to the denial were twofold: First, the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the beneficiary would be employed in a managerial or executive capacity within the United States. Second, there was insufficient evidence to prove that the beneficiary had been employed abroad in a qualifying managerial or executive role before the filing of the petition.

USCIS Findings

The USCIS found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to meet the requirements of a managerial or executive role. Additionally, the petitioner attempted to submit new evidence after the petition’s initial filing, which the USCIS deemed inadmissible for reconsideration. The Director also noted that the petitioner’s motion to reconsider failed to establish any errors in the previous decision, nor did it introduce new, substantive arguments or precedents.

Supporting Evidence

The petitioner submitted additional documentary evidence intended to support the beneficiary’s qualification after the initial petition was filed. However, this evidence was related to events that occurred after the petition’s filing date, rendering it irrelevant under the regulations. The omission of critical evidence during the petition’s initial review was cited as grounds for the denial.

Additional Notes

The Director emphasized that motions to reopen or reconsider must be supported by new facts or evidence that could influence the outcome of the decision. In this case, the petitioner did not meet the burden of proof necessary to justify reopening or reconsideration, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.


Conclusion

Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed, and the initial denial was upheld due to insufficient evidence and failure to meet the necessary criteria for the requested immigration benefit.

Download the Full Petition Review Here


Igbo Clifford
Igbo Clifford

python • technical writing • filmmaking

Articles: 1194

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *