Date of Decision: August 5, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Freight Forwarding
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President
Field: Freight Forwarding
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Case Overview
The petitioner in this case is H-S-(USA), Inc., a U.S.-based freight forwarding company seeking to employ the beneficiary as its president under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. This classification is designed to allow qualified foreign employees to be permanently transferred to the United States to work in an executive or managerial capacity. However, the Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, which led to an appeal.
Key Issues
The primary issues that led to the denial included the petitioner’s failure to establish a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary’s foreign employer and the lack of sufficient evidence proving that the beneficiary was employed in a managerial or executive capacity abroad. Despite a request for evidence (RFE) issued by the Director, the petitioner did not provide the necessary documentation, citing delays in Pakistan as the reason for the incomplete submission.
USCIS Findings
The USCIS and the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) determined that the petitioner did not meet the burden of proof to establish the qualifying relationship between the U.S. company and the foreign entity. The evidence provided, such as stock certificates and ownership documents, was insufficient and inconsistent, leading to the conclusion that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a parent-subsidiary or affiliate relationship required under the law.
Furthermore, the petitioner did not adequately address the RFE regarding the beneficiary’s managerial or executive role abroad. The job description provided was too broad and lacked the necessary detail to prove that the beneficiary held an executive or managerial position, leading to the denial of the appeal.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted a variety of documents, including stock certificates and tax returns, but these were either incomplete or did not support the claims made in the petition. The lack of timely and relevant documentation during the initial petition and the subsequent appeal was a critical factor in the denial of the case.
Additional Notes
The petitioner attempted to introduce new evidence during the appeal process; however, as this evidence was not submitted in response to the initial RFE, it was not considered by the AAO. This highlights the importance of responding comprehensively and accurately to RFEs within the allotted time frame to avoid similar outcomes.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed, and the petition was denied due to insufficient evidence regarding both the qualifying relationship between the petitioner and the foreign entity and the beneficiary’s role abroad.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
