sustained EB-1C Case: Health Products

(b)(6)
DATE: AUG 0 6 2015 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Office of Administrative Appeals 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Multinational Executive or Manager Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(l)(C) ofthe Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(C) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
Enclosed is the non-precedent decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) for your case. 
Thank you, 
;£ 
~Ron Rosenberg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals 
Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal 
will be sustained. 
The petitioner filed the Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I-140), to classify the 
beneficiary as a multinational manager or executive pursuant to section 203(b)(1)(C) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(C). The petitioner, a Maine 
limited liability company, develops non-medicinal health products. It states that it is an affiliate of 
a United Kingdom company. The petitioner seeks to employ the 
beneficiary as its Co-CEO and President of Sales and Distribution. 
The director denied the petition, concluding that the petitioner did not establish: (1) that it will 
employ the beneficiary in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity; and (2) that it has a 
qualifying relationship with the foreign entity. 
The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal. The director declined to treat the appeal as a motion 
and forwarded the appeal to this office. On appeal, the petitioner asserts that the director's decision 
was incorrect based on applicable law and policy and was not supported in light of the evidence in 
the record. The petitioner submits a brief and additional evidence in support of the appeal. 1 
We conduct appellate review on a de novo basis. See Soltane v. DOJ, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3d Cir. 
2004). Upon reviewing the entire record of proceeding, we conclude that the record now contains 
sufficient evidence to overcome the grounds for denial as stated in the director's decision. 
Specifically, the totality of the evidence establishes that the petitioner has a qualifying affiliate 
relationship with the beneficiary's foreign employer, and that the beneficiary will be employed in a 
qualifying executive capacity. 
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. § 1361. The petitioner in the instant case has 
sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
1 
Subsequent to the filing of the appeal, USCIS interviewed the beneficiary and the petitioner's Co-CEO at 
the USCIS Maine field office on May 11, 2015. The information and documentation provided 
during those interviews has been incorporated into the record of proceeding