Date of Decision: August 31, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Business Consultation
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President/CEO
Field: Business Consultation
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Approved
Case Overview
The petitioner, a consulting company that collaborates with cities, sought to employ the beneficiary as its President/CEO under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The petition aimed to permanently transfer the beneficiary, who was already serving as President/CEO, to the United States to continue in this executive role. However, the Nebraska Service Center initially denied the petition, questioning both the managerial/executive capacity of the beneficiary’s role and the qualifying relationship between the U.S. company and its foreign counterpart.
Key Issues
The main issues in the initial denial were whether the beneficiary’s role truly qualified as executive or managerial and whether the petitioner had a qualifying relationship with the foreign entity. Additionally, there was concern about the beneficiary’s 50% ownership of both entities, leading to questions about whether he could be considered an “employee” under the law.
USCIS Findings
The USCIS Director noted inconsistencies in the petitioner’s evidence, particularly focusing on a statement from the beneficiary about his role in “developing the company.” This statement was interpreted by the Director as indicating non-executive duties. However, upon appeal, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) found that the Director’s reliance on this single phrase was insufficient grounds for denial, especially given the extensive evidence provided by the petitioner demonstrating the beneficiary’s executive responsibilities both in the U.S. and abroad.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner provided substantial documentation, including a detailed description of the beneficiary’s job duties, organizational charts, and evidence of the beneficiary’s authority in decision-making and management. The petitioner also presented proof of the beneficiary’s role in the foreign entity and how he was relieved from non-executive tasks by his subordinates, both in the U.S. and internationally.
Additional Notes
The AAO emphasized that the Director’s decisions did not fully consider the totality of the evidence and were overly focused on a single out-of-context phrase from the beneficiary’s statement. The appeal highlighted the importance of reviewing all evidence comprehensively.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was sustained, and the petition was approved, recognizing the beneficiary’s role as an executive under the EB-1C classification.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
