Date of Decision: September 29, 2020
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Business Management
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President
Field: Business Management
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Case Overview
The petitioner, an operator of furniture stores, sought to employ the beneficiary as its president under the EB-1C immigrant classification for multinational managers and executives. This visa category is designed for individuals who have been employed in a managerial or executive capacity by an affiliate, parent, subsidiary, or branch of the U.S. employer abroad and who are coming to the U.S. to work in a similar capacity. Despite multiple attempts by the petitioner to address previous denials, the case has continued to face challenges in establishing eligibility for this classification.
Key Issues
The main issue in this case revolved around the petitioner’s failure to adequately address the grounds for the denial of its previous motions. Specifically, the petitioner did not sufficiently discuss the reasons for the dismissal of its sixth combined motions, which had been found untimely. Instead, the petitioner focused on providing evidence related to the beneficiary’s proposed employment and the qualifying relationship with the foreign employer, issues that had already been dismissed in earlier stages.
USCIS Findings
USCIS found that the petitioner’s latest motions suffered from the same defect as prior filings, as they did not address the grounds of the most recent dismissal. The failure to properly address the untimeliness of the sixth combined motions led to the dismissal of the current motions. USCIS emphasized that the petitioner must directly address the grounds for any prior dismissals to demonstrate eligibility for the requested benefit.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted evidence and argument concerning the beneficiary’s employment role and the business’s qualifying relationship with the foreign employer. However, this evidence was not new or relevant to the current grounds for dismissal, which pertained to the untimeliness of previous motions.
Additional Notes
USCIS underscored the importance of addressing all grounds for dismissal in subsequent motions and appeals. The petitioner’s repeated focus on issues that had already been adjudicated negatively impacted its ability to succeed in this appeal.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motions to reopen and reconsider were dismissed due to the petitioner’s failure to address the grounds of the most recent dismissal.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
