dismissed EB-1C Case: Management

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8206543 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : APR. 30, 2020 
Form 1-140, Petition for Multinational Managers or Executives 
The Petitioner seeks to permanently employ the Beneficiary as its President under the first preference 
immigrant classification for multinational executives or managers . Immigration and Nationality Act 
(the Act) section 203(b )( 1 )(C), 8 U.S .C. § 1153(b )( 1 )(C) . This classification allows a U.S. employer to 
permanently transfer a qualified foreign employee to the United States to work in an executive or 
managerial capacity. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate that the Beneficiary would be employed in an executive capacity in the United States . 
The Director denied a subsequent motion to reopen and reconsider, concluding that the Petitioner had 
not asserted new facts, 1 and that it had not cited binding precedent decisions or other legal authority 
establishing that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) incorrectly applied pertinent law 
or agency policy and that the prior decision was erroneous based on the evidence of record at the time. 2 
The matter is now before us on appeal. 
In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will summarily dismiss the appeal. 
The reason for filing an appeal is to provide an affected party with the means to remedy what it 
perceives as an erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact within a decision in the underlying 
proceeding. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v) . Here, the underlying decision on appeal is the Director's 
denial of the motion to reopen and reconsider (motion decision). On appeal, the Petitioner submits a 
brief and evidence that are similar to those previously submitted on motion, and it asserts that the 
Beneficiary would be employed in an executive capacity in the United States. Although the Petitioner 
addresses the ground for denial detailed in the Director's initial decision, it fails to specifically identify 
1 A motion to reopen must state new facts and be supported by documentary evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2). 
2 A motion to reconsider must establish that our decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy and that 
the decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record of proceedings at the time of the decision. 8 C.F .R. 
§ 103.5(a)(3). A motion to reconsider must be supported by a pertinent precedent or adopted decision, statutory or 
regulatory provision, or statement of USCIS or Department of Homeland Security policy. Id. 
any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact on the part of the Director in his motion decision. 
See 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2)-(3). 
As stated in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v), an appeal shall be summarily dismissed if the 
affected party fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact for the 
appeal. Therefore, the appeal will be summarily dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v). 
2