sustained EB-1C Case: Automotive Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF H-N-A-, INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: APR. 15, 2016 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a provider of management services to its parent company (a motor vehicle 
manufacturer), seeks to permanently employ the Beneficiary as an engineering coordinator under the 
first preference immigrant classification for multinational executives or managers. See Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act) § 203(b)(l)(C), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(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, Nebraska Service Center, denied the petition. The Director concluded that the evidence 
of record did not establish that: (1) the Beneficiary will be employed in the United States in a 
qualifying managerial or executive capacity; and (2) the Beneficiary has been employed abroad in a 
qualifying managerial or executive capacity. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and 
asserts that the Director erred in finding that the Petitioner had not provided enough details about the 
Beneficiary's work. 
Upon de novo review, we will sustain the appeal. 
Upon reviewing the entire record of proceeding, we conclude that the record contains sufficient 
evidence to overcome the grounds for the denial. Specifically, the totality of the evidence now 
establishes that the Petitioner has satisfied the legal criteria regarding the Beneficiary's qualifying 
employment with his former employer abroad and with the petitioning U.S. entity. The Petitioner 
has provided sufficient information and evidence to show that the Beneficiary worked as a function 
manager abroad and will be employed as a function manager in the United States. 
In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely 
with the petitioner. Section 291 ofthe Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. The Petitioner has met that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as Matter ofH-N-A-, Inc., ID# 16055 (AAO Apr. 15, 2016)