Date of Decision: FEB. 3, 2021
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Retail of Cigars, Pipes, and Tobacco Products
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President/CEO
Field: Retail of Cigars, Pipes, and Tobacco Products
Nationality: Ugandan
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Case Overview
The petitioner, a retailer of cigars, pipes, and tobacco products, sought to permanently employ the beneficiary as its “President/CEO” under the first preference immigrant classification for multinational executives or managers (EB-1C). The beneficiary, originally employed in Uganda, was claimed to have held a managerial and executive position with a foreign parent entity before being transferred to the United States.
Key Issues
The primary issue revolved around the inconsistencies in the beneficiary’s foreign employment history. The Director of the Texas Service Center found discrepancies in the evidence provided, particularly regarding the dates and nature of the beneficiary’s employment abroad. These discrepancies led to a finding of willful misrepresentation, which significantly impacted the decision to deny the petition.
USCIS Findings
The USCIS determined that the petitioner and the beneficiary provided conflicting evidence about the beneficiary’s employment history, which suggested that the beneficiary made a willful misrepresentation of a material fact. This misrepresentation was considered material to the eligibility for the EB-1C classification, as it cut off a potential line of inquiry regarding the beneficiary’s qualifications.
Supporting Evidence
Key evidence considered in this case included tax forms, employment verification letters, and monthly payment vouchers from the foreign employer. However, the inconsistencies in these documents, particularly with the dates of employment and the establishment of the foreign entity, led to doubts about the authenticity of the evidence.
Additional Notes
The case was remanded because the petitioner was not properly notified about the finding of willful misrepresentation against them, which is a procedural error. The USCIS will further review whether such a finding against the petitioner is warranted.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The Director’s decision was withdrawn, and the case was remanded for further consideration.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
