remanded EB-1C Case: Finance

(b)(6)
DATE: 
JUN 2 9 2013 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W., MS 2090 
Washington , DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
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. ·§ 1153(b)(l)(C) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents 
related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please be advised that 
any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office. 
Thank you, 
~RA~ 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The preference visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas Service Center ("the 
director"). The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The 
director's decision will be withdrawn and the matter will be remanded for entry of a new decision. 
The petitioner is a Florida corporation that seeks to employ the beneficiary in the United States as its 
financial manager. Accordingly, the petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as an 
employment-based immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(1)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(1)(C), as a multinational executive or manager. 
The director reviewed the petition and initial evidence and determined that the petition did not 
warrant approval. On September 5, 2012, the director issued a notice of intent to deny (NOID) 
informing the petitioner that "the United States employer and the foreign employer are unrelated 
business entities" and that the petitioner "has not submitted verifiable documentation to establish 
stock ownership in the U.S. company." The director further advised the petitioner that it "lacks the 
organizational complexity to warrant the employment of the beneficiary in a primarily managerial or 
executive capacity," and that "the evidence of record does not establish that she will primarily 
perform managerial or executive duties." The NOID contained no specific references to the 
evidence submitted in support of the petition. The director notified the petitioner that it had 30 days 
to submit evidence in support of the Form 1-140 and indicated that "any evidence submitted will be 
carefully reviewed." 
On October 1, 2012, counsel for the petitioner submitted a letter and approximately 20 exhibits in 
response to the NOID. The petitioner submitted evidence relevant to the director's concerns 
regarding the petitioner's qualifying relationship with the beneficiary's prior foreign employer and 
the beneficiary's proposed employment capacity in the United States. 
On October 10, 2012, the director denied the petition. Upon review, the notice of decision consists 
of a nearly verbatim restatement of the NOID. The director failed to address any of the evidence 
submitted in support of the petition and failed to acknowledge the petitioner's timely-submitted 
response to the NOID. 
When denying a petition, a director has an affirmative duty to explain the specific reasons for the 
denial; this duty includes informing a petitioner why the evidence failed to satisfy its burden of proof 
pursuant to section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. See 8 C.P.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(i). Upon review of 
the NOID and final decision issued in this matter, the director has not fulfilled this duty. The 
petitioner did not have adequate notice of the reasons for denial as a basis for filing the appeal. 
Accordingly, the director's decision dated October 10, 2012 will be withdrawn, and the petition will 
be remanded to the director. The director is instructed to review the record of proceeding, including 
the petitioner's response to the NOID, and to issue a new decision. Any adverse decision or new 
NOID should reflect a review of all relevant evidence, material issues of fact and law and state the 
specific reasons for denial of the petition. 
(b)(6)
Page 3 
As always in these proceedings, the burden of proof rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. 
ORDER: The director's decision is withdrawn. The petition is remanded to the director 
for further action in accordance with the foregoing discussion and entry of a 
new decision which, if adverse, shall be certified to the Administrative 
Appeals Office for review.