Date of Decision: March 27, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Executive Management
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President
Field: Executive Management
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Case Overview
The petitioner, S-D-Inc., a retailer and wholesaler of baby products, sought to employ the beneficiary as its President under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The petition was filed to facilitate the permanent transfer of the beneficiary, who had been employed in a managerial capacity abroad, to continue serving in a similar capacity in the United States.
Key Issues
The primary issue in this case was the failure to establish a qualifying relationship between the petitioner and the entity that employed the beneficiary abroad. Additionally, the USCIS Director made a separate finding of fraud or willful misrepresentation of a material fact, which further complicated the petition’s approval process.
USCIS Findings
Upon review, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) determined that the USCIS Director’s decision lacked sufficient analysis and failed to provide a fair opportunity for the petitioner to contest the decision. Specifically, the AAO found that the Director did not adequately support the finding of fraud or willful misrepresentation and did not provide a thorough analysis of the qualifying relationship issue. The AAO withdrew the Director’s decision but remanded the case for further review due to inconsistencies in the record concerning the beneficiary’s foreign employment and the relationship between the petitioner and the foreign entity.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner provided various documents, including employment records, ownership details, and a statement from the beneficiary’s husband, to demonstrate the relationship between the petitioner and the foreign entity. However, the evidence was deemed insufficient due to inconsistencies in the documentation, particularly concerning the ownership structure of the foreign company.
Additional Notes
The AAO highlighted that the petitioner failed to clarify discrepancies related to the beneficiary’s employment history and the corporate relationship between the U.S. petitioner and the foreign employer. These inconsistencies were critical in determining the eligibility for the EB-1C classification and required further examination.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The decision was remanded for further proceedings to resolve the inconsistencies and to allow the petitioner an opportunity to provide additional evidence supporting the qualifying relationship and the beneficiary’s foreign employment.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
