dismissed EB-1C

dismissed EB-1C Case: International Commerce

📅 Date unknown 👤 Company 📂 International Commerce

Decision Summary

The appeal was rejected on procedural grounds, not on its merits. It was improperly filed by the beneficiary's representative, whereas regulations require the petitioner to be the filing party. The beneficiary of a visa petition is not considered an 'affected party' with legal standing to file an appeal.

Criteria Discussed

Managerial Or Executive Capacity Doing Business For At Least One Year Standing To File An Appeal

Sign up free to download the original PDF

View Full Decision Text
U.S. Department of Eomeland Security 
) 20 Mars. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
rdentifylng data deleteQ to 
of ae~~?q-l 
FILE: y LIN 04 216 50530 Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: J~L 2 6 ?m 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Multinational Executive or Manager Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(l)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 1153(b)(l)(C) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
COURTESY COPY TO: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based visa petition. The 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected 
pursuant to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 9 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A). 
The petitioner filed the immigrant petition seehng to classify the beneficiary as a multinational manager or 
executive pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 
3 1153(b)(l)(C). The petitioner is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Michigan that is 
engaged in international commerce. 
 It seeks to employ the beneficiary as its president. 
 The director 
concluded that the petitioner had not demonstrated that the beneficiary had been employed by the foreign 
entity or would be employed in the United States in a primarily managerial or executive capacity. The 
director also determined that the petitioner had not been doing business in the United States for at least one 
year prior to the filing of the immigrant petition. This timely appeal followed. 
In order to properly file an appeal, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 4 103.3(a)(2)(i) provides that the affected party 
must file the complete appeal within thirty days of service of the unfavorable decision. In accordance with 8 
C.F.R. 3 103.3(a)(l)(iii)(B), "affected party" means, in addition to Citizenship and Immigration Services 
(CIS), the person or entity with legal standing in a proceeding. It does not include the beneficiary of a visa 
petition. 
Here, Form G-28, Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative, was filed by a representative of the 
beneficiary. Additionally, Form I-290B indicates that the beneficiary is the represented party m the present 
appeal. Neither document identifies the petitioner as a represented party. CIS regulations specifically 
prohibit a beneficiary of a visa petition, or a representative acting on a beneficiary's behalf, from filing a 
petition; the beneficiary of a visa petition is not a recognized party in a proceeding. 8 C.F.R. $ 103.2(a)(3). 
As the beneficiary is not an affected party, counsel is not authorized to file an appeal. 8 C.F.R. 
103.3(a)(l)(iii)(B). 
As the appeal was not properly filed, it must be rejected. 8 C.F.R. 
 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(I). 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected. 
Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial

MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.

Avoid This in My Petition →

No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.