remanded EB-1C Case: Management

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Km. A3042 
Wash~ngton, DC 20529 
data rn ,p?& 
DT~V-~ WY~~ U. S. Citizenship 
&%rrdooo~~~ and Immigration 
FILE: Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: JL)~ J i 2M5 
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. tj 11 53(b)(l)(C) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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. 
Robert P. Wiemann, ~irector 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California Service Center, approved the instant employment-based petition on 
September 14, 2000. Thereafter the director issued a Government Motion to Reopen/Reconsider/Intent to 
Deny and ultimately issued a notice denying the petition. The matter is now before the Administrative 
Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The petition will be remanded to the California Service Center. 
On May 7, 2004, the director issued a Government Motion to Reopen/Reconsider/Intent to Deny, affording 
the petitioner 30 days to submit evidence and/or a written statement in rebuttal to the notice. On June 4, 
2004, counsel for the petitioner submitted a company support letter and documentation in response to the 
director's motion to reopen. Upon review of the evidence submitted in response, the director denied the 
petition and informed the petitioner that it could appeal the decision within 30 days. On August 23, 2004, the 
California Service Center received a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal, and forwarded the matter to the AAO. 
Counsel indicates on the Form I-290B that a separate brief or evidence will not be submitted. Counsel states: 
"We believe that the evidence submitted in support of the 1-140 petition and in our response to the California 
Service Center's notice of intent to deny the 1-140 petition is sufficient to show [the beneficiary's] eligibility 
for Multinational Manager classification." 
Following approval of an immigrant or nonimmigrant petition, the director may revoke approval of the 
petition in accordance with the statute and regulations. Specifically, Section 205 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 11 55 
allows the Secretary of Homeland Security, at any time, for what he deems to be "good and sufficient cause," 
to revoke the approval of a visa petition. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 205.2 provides that a Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (CIS) officer may revoke approval of an immigrant petition following notice to the 
petitioner of the intent to revoke and after providing the petitioner with an "opportunity to offer evidence in 
support of the petition . . . and in opposition to the grounds alleged for revocation of the approval." ' Pursuant 
to Mutter of Estime, 19 I&N Dec. 450 (BIA 1987), the director's notice of intent to revoke must include a 
specific statement of the facts and supporting evidence underlying the proposed action. Similarly, the 
petitioner must be advised of derogatory evidence of which it is unaware, and must be provided with an 
opportunity to rebut the evidence and submit supporting documentation. Id. at 45 1. Further, where a notice 
of intent to revoke "is based on an unsupported statement or an unstated presumption, or where the petitioner 
is unaware and has not been advised of derogatory evidence, revocation of the visa petition cannot be 
sustained, even if the petitioner did not respond to the notice of intention to revoke." Id. at 452. 
With regard to a director's decision to revoke, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ 205.2(c) further indicates: 
If, upon reconsideration, the approval previously granted is revoked, the director shall 
provide the petitioner or the self-petitioner with a written notification of the decision that 
explains the specific reasons for the revocation. 
In the instant matter, rather than issuing a notice of intent to revoke, the director issued a CIS motion to 
reopen pursuant to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 9 103.5(a). Generally speaking, a CIS motion to reopen is 
reserved for applications, such as 1-539, Application to ExtendIChange Nonimmigrant Status, 1-90, 
Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card, or 1-765, Application for Employment Authorization. The 
proper course of action in revoking approval of an immigrant or nonimmigrant petition is to issue a notice of 
' The regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(1)(9)(iii) outlines the requirements for revocation of a nonimmigrant 
petition. 
Page 3 
intent to revoke pursuant to the appropriate regulation. As noted above, the petitioner must be notified of the 
specific facts and evidence underlying the proposed revocation, and be afforded an opportunity to rebut the 
evidence. Although the director informed the petitioner, through the notice of intent to deny, of the 
deficiencies of the record in support of the 1-140 petition, the director did not properly characterize the matter 
as a revocation matter. In characterizing the matter as a denial of the petition rather than a revocation of the 
initial approval of the petition, the director also allowed the petitioner 30 days to appeal his decision rather 
than the 15 days required in revocation matters. 
To underline the necessity of properly characterizing the director's decision and establishing the required time 
limits set out by regulation to respond to or to appeal decisions, this matter will be remanded to the California 
Service Center for further proceedings in accordance with this decision. 
ORDER: The petition is remanded to the director to issue a notice of intent to revoke, and if the director's 
ultimate decision is to revoke approval of the petition, to certify the decision to the AAO for review.