sustained EB-1C Case: Electronic Parts

identifyingdatadeletedto
preventclearlyunwarranted
invasionofpersoadprivacy
VUBLICCOPY
U.S.Departmentof HomelandSecurity
U. S.CitizenshipandImmigrationServices
AdministrativeAppealsOffice (AAO)
20 MassachusettsAve.N.W.,MS 2090
Washington,DC 20529-2090
U.S.Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
DATE DEC212011 OFFICE:NEBRASKASERVICECENTER FILE:
IN RE Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
PETITION: ImmigrantPetitionforAlienWorkerasaMultinationalExecutiveorManagerPursuantto
Section203(b)(1)(C)of theImmigrationandNationalityAct, 8 U.S.C.§ 1153(b)(1)(C)
ONBEHALFOFPETITIONER:
INSTRUCTIONS:
Thisisthedecisionof theAdministrativeAppealsOfficein yourcase.All documentshavebeenreturnedto
theofficethatoriginallydecidedyourcase.Anyfurtherinquirymustbemadeto thatoffice.
Thankyou,
PerryRhew
Chief,AdministrativeAppealsOffice
www.uscis.gov
Page2
DISCUSSION:Thepreferencevisa petitionwasdeniedby the Director,NebraskaServiceCenter. The
petitionersubsequentlyfiled a motionto reopenandreconsiderbeforethedirector. Thedirectorgrantedthe
motion to reopenand issueda new decisiondenyingthe petition. The matter is now before the
AdministrativeAppealsOffice(AAO) onappeal Theappealwill besustained.
Thepetitioneris a limitedliability companythatwasorganizedin theStateof CaliforniaonNovember17,
2005. Thepetitioneris a wholesalerof electronicpartsandseeksto employthebeneficiaryasits president.
Thepetitionerendeavorsto classifythe beneficiaryas an employment-basedimmigrantpursuantto section
203(b)(1)(C)of theImmigrationandNationalityAct (theAct), 8 U.S.C.§ 1153(b)(1)(C),asa multinational
executiveormanager.
Section203(b)of theActstatesin pertinentpart:
(1) PriorityWorkers.-- Visasshallfirst bemadeavailable. . . to qualifiedimmigrantswho
arealiensdescribedin anyof thefollowingsubparagraphs(A) through(C):
* * *
(C) Certain Multinational Executivesand Managers.- An alien is describedin this
subparagraphif the alien,in the 3 yearsprecedingthe time of the alien'sapplicationfor
classificationand admissioninto the United Statesunderthis subparagraph,has been
employedfor at least1yearby a firm or corporationor otherlegalentityor anaffiliateor
subsidiarythereofandwho seeksto entertheUnitedStatesin orderto continueto render
servicesto the sameemployeror to a subsidiaryor affiliate thereofin a capacitythat is
managerialor executive.
Thelanguageof thestatuteis specificin limitingthisprovisionto only thoseexecutivesandmanagerswho
havepreviouslyworkedfor a firm,corporationorotherlegalentity,oranaffiliateor subsidiaryof thatentity,
andwhoarecomingto theUnitedStatestoworkfor thesameentity,or itsaffiliateor subsidiary.
The statutory definition of "managerialcapacity" allows for both "personnelmanagers"and "function
managers."Seesection101(a)(44)(A)(i)and(ii) of theAct, 8 U.S.C.§ 1101(a)(44)(A)(i)and(ii). Personnel
managersare requiredto primarily superviseand control the work of other supervisory,professional,or
managerialemployees.Contraryto the commonunderstandingof the word "manager,"the statuteplainly
statesthata "first linesupervisoris notconsideredto beactingin a managerialcapacitymerelyby virtueof
the supervisor'ssupervisory duties unless the employeessupervisedare professional." Section
101(a)(44)(A)(iv)of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(ii)(B)((2).If a beneficiarydirectly supervisesother
employees,thebeneficiarymustalsohavetheauthoritytohireandfire thoseemployees,orrecommendthose
actions,andtakeotherpersonnelactions. 8C.F.R.§214.2(l)(ii)(B)(3).
Thestatutorydefinitionof the term "executivecapacity"focuseson a person'selevatedpositionwithin a
complexorganizationalhierarchy,includingmajorcomponentsor functionsof the organization,andthat
person'sauthorityto directtheorganization.Section101(a)(44)(B)of theAct, 8 U.S.C.§ 1101(a)(44)(B).
Underthestatute,abeneficiarymusthavetheability to "directthemanagement"and"establishthegoalsand
policies"of thatorganization.Inherentto thedefinition,theorganizationmusthavea subordinatelevelof
employeesfor the beneficiaryto directandthebeneficiarymustprimarily focuson the broadgoalsand
Page3
policiesof the organizationratherthantheday-to-operationsof the enterprise.An individualwill not be
deemedanexecutiveunderthestatutesimplybecausetheyhaveanexecutivetitle or becausethey"direct"the
enterpriseastheowneror solemanagerialemployee.Thebeneficiarymustalsoexercise"widelatitudein
discretionarydecisionmaking" and receiveonly "generalsupervisionor direction from higher level
executives,theboardof directors,or stockholdersof theorganization."Id.
In his latestdecision,thedirectorfoundthatthepetitioner'sorganizationalcompositionwasinsufficientto
relievethebeneficiaryfrombeingableto allocatetheprimaryportionof hertimeto qualifyingtaskswithin a
managerialor executivecapacity.Thedirectoralsodeterminedthatthesalariespaidto thebeneficiaryand
hersubordinatesarenotcommensuratewith professionalstaffpositions.
Onappeal,counseldisputesthedirector'sdecisionandsubmitsanappellatebriefdiscussingthebeneficiary's
rolewithintheU.S.entityin thecontextof thepetitioner'sorganizationalstructure.TheAAO'sreviewof the
recordindicatesthatthedirector'sadversedecisionshouldbewithdrawn.In particular,theAAO notesthat
thedirector'srelianceonthebeneficiary'ssalaryandthesalariesof hersubordinatesasanindicationof the
beneficiary'sjob capacityisnotsupportedbyanystatutoryorregulatoryprovisions.
Thebeneficiary'spositionis at thetopof anorganizationalhierarchycomprisedof onemanagerialtier and
staffemployeeswhoaretaskedwith thepetitioner'svariousdaily operationalfunctions. Thefact thatthe
beneficiarywasnotstaffedwith a technicalwriter at thetime thepetitionwasfiled, aspointedout in the
director'sdecision,doesnot precludethe beneficiaryfrom meetingthe statutorycriteriafor managerialor
executivecapacity.
Thebeneficiaryis notrequiredto allocate100%of hertimeto managerial-or executive-leveltaskssolongas
thenon-qualifyingtasksthebeneficiarywouldperformareonlyincidentalto theproposedpositionwith the
U.S.entity. It is notedthatanemployeewho"primarily"performsthetasksnecessaryto producea product
ortoprovideservicesisnotconsideredtobe"primarily"employedin amanagerialorexecutivecapacity.See
sections101(a)(44)(A)and(B) of theAct (requiringthatone"primarily"performtheenumeratedmanagerial
or executiveduties);seealsoMatter of ChurchScientologyInternational,19I&N Dec.593,604(Comm.
1988).
Despiteanyshortfallsin thebeneficiary'sjob descriptions,theinformationprovidedasawholeis sufficientto
meetthepreponderanceof theevidencestandardthatthebeneficiarywouldmorelikelythannotbeemployed
in theUnitedStatesin aqualifyingmanagerialorexecutivecapacity.Seesection101(a)(44)(A)of theAct.
In visapetitionproceedings,theburdenof proving eligibility for thebenefitsoughtremainsentirelywith the
petitioner.Section291of theAct, 8U.S.C.§ 1361.Thepetitionerin theinstantcasehasmetthatburden.
ORDER: Theappealis sustained.