Date of Decision: March 3, 2016
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: International Exhibitions Management
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President
Field: International Exhibitions Management
Nationality: Chinese
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Case Overview
The petitioner, I-P-E- Inc., an international exhibitions company, sought to employ the beneficiary as its president under the EB-1C immigrant classification for multinational executives or managers. The beneficiary had been employed by the company’s Chinese parent entity in various managerial capacities before being transferred to the U.S. to oversee its operations. The petitioner argued that the beneficiary’s role met the criteria for a managerial or executive capacity, which is a prerequisite for the EB-1C classification.
Key Issues
The key issues identified were whether the beneficiary had been employed in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity abroad and whether the U.S. petitioner intended to employ the beneficiary in such a capacity. USCIS found inconsistencies in the documentation regarding the beneficiary’s role and the relationship between the U.S. and foreign entities. Additionally, the petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence demonstrating that the beneficiary’s duties were primarily managerial or executive rather than operational.
USCIS Findings
The USCIS determined that the petitioner did not adequately establish that the beneficiary was employed in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity. The evidence provided, including job descriptions and organizational charts, was deemed insufficient to prove that the beneficiary’s role in the foreign company was primarily managerial. Furthermore, the petitioner did not clearly demonstrate that the U.S. entity intended to employ the beneficiary in a similar capacity, given the company’s small size and lack of a substantial support staff.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner submitted various documents, including job descriptions, organizational charts, and affidavits, to support the beneficiary’s qualifications. However, the evidence lacked specificity and consistency, leading to doubts about the accuracy of the information provided. The USCIS highlighted the need for detailed, credible evidence to establish both the beneficiary’s prior managerial role and the prospective role in the U.S.
Additional Notes
USCIS also noted that the petitioner failed to resolve inconsistencies in the record regarding the beneficiary’s foreign employer and the qualifying relationship between the U.S. entity and the foreign company. These unresolved discrepancies further undermined the petitioner’s case.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed due to the petitioner’s inability to prove that the beneficiary was employed in a managerial or executive capacity, both abroad and in the U.S. The petitioner also failed to demonstrate a qualifying relationship between the U.S. entity and the foreign company.
