sustained EB-1C Case: Culinary

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Of$ce ofAdministrative Appeals MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U. S. citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
SRC 07 800 26683 
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. 5 1 153(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. 
b 
Perry Rhew / 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The preference visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska Service Center. The 
petitioner subsequently filed a motion seeking to have the matter reopened. The director granted the motion 
and issued a new decision. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. 
The decision of the director will be withdrawn and the appeal will be sustained. 
The petitioner is a multinational corporation that seeks to employ the beneficiary as its executive chef. 
Accordingly, the petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as an employment-based immigrant pursuant 
to section 203(b)(l)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(C), as a 
multinational executive or manager. The director determined that the petitioner failed to establish that it 
would employ the beneficiary in a managerial or executive capacity and denied the petition on that basis. 
On appeal, counsel disputes the director's findings and submits additional documentation regarding the 
organization's structural composition and the beneficiary's position within the petitioning organization. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states in pertinent part: 
(1) Priority Workers. -- Visas shall first be made available . . . to qualified immigrants who 
are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): 
(C) Certain Multinational Executives and Managers. -- An alien is described in this 
subparagraph if the alien, in the 3 years preceding the time of the alien's application for 
classification and admission into the United States under this subparagraph, has been 
employed for at least 1 year by a firm or corporation or other legal entity or an affiliate or 
subsidiary thereof and who seeks to enter the United States in order to continue to render 
services to the same employer or to a subsidiary or affiliate thereof in a capacity that is 
managerial or executive. 
The language of the statute is specific in limiting this provision to only those executives and managers who 
have previously worked for a firm, corporation or other legal entity, or an affiliate or subsidiary of that entity, 
and who are coming to the United States to work for the same entity, or its affiliate or subsidiary. 
The statutory definition of "managerial capacity" allows for both "personnel managers" and "function 
managers." See section 101(a)(44)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 10 l(a)(44)(A)(i) and (ii). Personnel 
managers are required to primarily supervise and control the work of other supervisory, professional, or 
managerial employees. Contrary to the common understanding of the word "manager," the statute plainly 
states that a "first line supervisor is not considered to be acting in a managerial capacity merely by virtue of 
the supervisor's supervisory duties unless the employees supervised are professional." Section 
10 1 (a)(44)(A)(iv) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. 5 2 14.2(l)(ii)(B)((2). If a beneficiary directly supervises other 
employees, the beneficiary must also have the authority to hire and fire those employees, or recommend those 
actions, and take other personnel actions. 8 C.F.R. tj 214.2(l)(ii)(B)(3). 
In the denial, the director stated that the description of the beneficiary's position was "unconvincing, 
somewhat vague and redundant, [and] primarily those of a first-line supervisor." Specifics are clearly an 
important indication of whether a beneficiary's duties are primarily executive or managerial in nature, 
otherwise meeting the definitions would simply be a matter of reiterating the regulations. Fedin Bros. Co., 
Ltd. v. Sava, 724 F. Supp. 1 103 (E.D.N.Y. 1989), apd, 905 F.2d 4 1 (2d. Cir. 1990). 
On appeal, counsel for the petitioner restates the beneficiary's job duties and clarifies the beneficiary's 
position within the petitioner's organization. Counsel emphasizes that the beneficiary manages a department 
within the organization. 
While the director was correct in placing great emphasis on the descriptions of the beneficiary's duties with 
the U.S. entity, this element must be assessed in light of a comprehensive analysis of other relevant factors. 
These factors include the overall organizational structure, which in the present matter is complex with a 
number of managerial tiers, as well as the beneficiary's position with respect to others within the department 
he manages. Consideration of these factors strongly indicates that the petitioning entity is widely staffed with 
subordinate first-line supervisors and individuals who are assigned to perform the daily non-qualifying tasks. 
CJ: Family Inc. v. USCIS, 469 F.3d 13 13 (9th Cir. 2006) 
The documentation provided is sufficient to meet the preponderance of the evidence standard that the 
beneficiary would more likely than not be employed in the United States in a primarily managerial or 
executive capacity. See section 101(a)(44)(A) of the Act. 
In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely with the 
petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 9 1361. The petitioner in the instant case has sustained that 
burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained.