Date of Decision: June 19, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: President and General Manager
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President and General Manager
Field: Wholesale Jewelry
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Case Overview
In this case, the petitioner, a wholesale jewelry company, sought to permanently employ the beneficiary as the President and General Manager under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. This classification allows U.S. employers to transfer qualified foreign employees to the United States to work in an executive or managerial capacity. Initially, the petition was approved; however, the Director of the Texas Service Center later revoked the approval, citing several deficiencies in the petition, including the lack of a qualifying relationship between the petitioner and the beneficiary’s former employer and insufficient evidence that the beneficiary’s role was indeed managerial or executive in nature.
Key Issues
The primary issues that led to the revocation of the petition were:
- Qualifying Relationship: The USCIS found that the petitioner did not have a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary’s previous employer abroad, which is a crucial requirement for the EB-1C classification.
- Managerial or Executive Capacity: The petitioner failed to sufficiently demonstrate that the beneficiary had been employed in a managerial or executive capacity in his prior role abroad and that he would continue in such a capacity in the U.S. The submitted evidence suggested that the beneficiary was primarily engaged in non-qualifying operational tasks, rather than high-level managerial duties.
- Willful Misrepresentation: Initially, the Director concluded that there was willful misrepresentation of material facts by the petitioner and beneficiary, although this finding was later withdrawn upon appeal.
USCIS Findings
Upon reviewing the petition and subsequent appeal, the USCIS determined that the petitioner had not provided adequate evidence to overturn the revocation. Specifically, the petitioner’s submissions included conflicting duty descriptions for the beneficiary, with one emphasizing non-qualifying operational tasks. The USCIS also found that the evidence presented failed to establish that the beneficiary supervised other managerial or professional employees or managed an essential function of the organization, which are critical criteria for proving managerial capacity.
Supporting Evidence
The key evidence considered by the USCIS included organizational charts, duty descriptions, and various documents intended to substantiate the managerial role of the beneficiary. However, the USCIS found these documents insufficient. For example, while the petitioner provided some evidence indicating that administrative tasks were delegated to subordinates, there was substantial evidence showing the beneficiary’s direct involvement in non-qualifying tasks, which undermined the petitioner’s claims.
Additional Notes
The petitioner attempted to argue on motion that the previous decisions were based on a misinterpretation of the evidence. However, the USCIS found that the petitioner had not adequately addressed the fundamental issues, such as the conflicting duty descriptions and lack of substantial evidence of the beneficiary’s managerial role. The petitioner’s failure to rectify these issues ultimately led to the denial of both the motion to reopen and the motion to reconsider.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The USCIS denied the motion to reopen and reconsider, upholding the revocation of the petition. The petitioner did not meet the burden of proof to establish the beneficiary’s eligibility for the EB-1C classification.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
