sustained EB-1C Case: Automotive Industry

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF T -A-, INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: APR. 30,2018 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, an automotive supplier, seeks to permanently employ the Beneficiary as its 
engineering program manager under the first preference immigrant classification for multinational 
executives or managers. See 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 Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not 
establish that the Beneficiary was employed abroad in a managerial or executive capacity prior to his 
entry to the United States to work for the Petitioner as a nonimmigrant in February 2015. Specifically, 
the Director found that the Petitioner's response to a request for evidence (RFE) did not contain 
requested infom1ation regarding the Beneficiary's employment in Canada for the period January 2014 
until February 2015. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submitted a detailed letter describing the Beneficiary's employment with 
its affiliated Canadian entity during this time period. After initial review of the appeal, we issued an 
RFE and asked that the Petitioner provide additional evidence of the Beneficiary's residence outside 
the United States for at least one year in the three years preceding his February 2015 entry to work 
for the Petitioner. The Petitioner submitted a timely response. 
Upon de novo review of the record, we will sustain the appeal. The Petitioner has now established 
by a preponderance of the evidence that the Beneficiary was employed abroad in a managerial 
capacity for at least one year during the three years preceding his entry to the U.S. as a 
nonimmigrant. The evidence is sufficient to establish that the Beneficiary primarily performed 
managerial duties as defined at section 101(a)(44)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(44)(A), and 
demonstrates that he managed a department or subdivision of the company, supervised a subordinate 
staff of 22 professionals, and exercised discretion over the day-to-day operations of the engineering 
program he was assigned to manage. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as Matter T-A-. Inc .. ID# 1087023 (AAO Apr. 30, 2018)