Date of Decision: May 12, 2017
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Gas Stations and Convenience Stores
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President and CEO
Field: Gas Stations and Convenience Stores
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, an owner and operator of gas stations and convenience stores, sought to permanently employ the beneficiary as its president and CEO under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary would be employed in the U.S. in an executive capacity.
On appeal, the petitioner submitted a brief asserting that the Director misunderstood the facts regarding the nature, size, and scope of its operation and incorrectly found that the petitioner provided inconsistent evidence. However, after a de novo review, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the Director that the petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the beneficiary’s role would be primarily executive in nature.
Key Issues
The primary issue was whether the petitioner could demonstrate that the beneficiary would be employed in an executive capacity in the U.S. The AAO determined that the petitioner did not provide specific enough details about the beneficiary’s duties to prove that they were primarily executive. Additionally, inconsistencies in the organizational structure and staffing levels further weakened the petitioner’s case.
USCIS Findings
The AAO found that the petitioner’s description of the beneficiary’s duties was vague and did not sufficiently establish that the beneficiary would primarily perform executive tasks. The AAO also noted that the petitioner failed to resolve discrepancies in the organizational chart and employee wage evidence, raising questions about the actual nature of the beneficiary’s role.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted job descriptions, organizational charts, and financial records. However, the evidence was found to be inconsistent and insufficient to meet the requirements for the EB-1C classification.
Additional Notes
The AAO emphasized that to qualify for the EB-1C classification, the petitioner must provide clear and consistent documentation proving both the executive capacity of the beneficiary and the petitioner’s ongoing business activities.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed. The petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary would be employed in a qualifying executive capacity as required for the EB-1C classification.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
