sustained EB-1C

sustained EB-1C Case: Manufacturing/Supply

πŸ“… Date unknown πŸ‘€ Company πŸ“‚ Manufacturing/Supply

Decision Summary

The appeal was sustained because the Director had incorrectly concluded the beneficiary would not be employed in a full-time executive capacity. The AAO found that the Director failed to properly consider the foreign employees who support the U.S. entity under the beneficiary's supervision, which relieved her from non-qualifying duties. The AAO clarified that overseeing these foreign support staff was integral to her full-time U.S. executive role.

Criteria Discussed

Managerial Or Executive Capacity Full-Time Employment Staffing Levels

Sign up free to download the original PDF

View Full Decision Text
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OFT-USA, INC. 
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JUNE 22, 2017 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a supplier of sanitary articles, cosmetics, and medical devices, seeks to permanently 
employ the Beneficiary as its chief operating officer under the first preference immigrant 
classification of a multinational executive or manager. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the 
Act) section 203(b)(1)(C), 8 U.S.C. Β§ 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 of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not 
establish, as required, that: ( 1) the Beneficiary would be employed in the United States in a 
managerial or executive capacity, and (2) she would be employed on a full-time basis. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and asserts that the Director mischaracterized 
the nature of the Beneficiary's responsibilities, her position within the corporate hierarchy, and her 
responsibility for directing a major component or function of the broader multinational organization. 
Upon de novo review, we will sustain the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
Section 203(b )(1 )(C) of the Act makes an immigrant visa available to a beneficiary who, in the three 
years preceding the filing of the petition, has been employed outside the United States for at least one 
year in a managerial or executive capacity, and seeks to enter the United States in order to continue to 
render managerial or executive services to the same employer or to its subsidiary or affiliate. 
A United States employer may file Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, to classify a 
beneficiary under section 203(b)(1)(C) of the Act as a multinational executive or manager. The petition 
must include a statement from an authorized official of the petitioning United States employer which 
demonstrates that the beneficiary has been employed abroad in a managerial or executive capacity for at 
least one year in the three years preceding the filing of the petition, that the beneficiary is coming to 
work in the United States for the same employer or a subsidiary or affiliate of the foreign employer, and 
that the prospective U.S. employer has been doing business for at least one year. See 8 C.F.R. 
Β§ 204.50)(3). 
Matter ofT-USA, Inc. 
II. DISCUSSION 
The Director found that the evidence did not establish that the Beneficiary would be employed in a 
managerial or executive capacity as defined at section 101(a)(44) ofthe Act; 8 U.S.C. Β§ 1101(a)(44), 
or that her employment for the Petitioner would be full-time. 
In denying the petition, the Director emphasized the Petitioner's staffing levels, noting that its staff 
of four subordinate employees did not appear to be comprised of managers, professionals, or 
supervisors and did not appear sufficiently relieve the Beneficiary from involvement in a wide range 
of daily functions associated with running the Petitioner's business. Further, the Director found that 
the Beneficiary's employment could not be considered full-time because the Petitioner indicated that 
20 percent of her time would be spent "making management decisions concerning the affiliate in 
Poland." 
Upon review of the petition and evidence, including the evidence submitted on appeal, we find that 
the Petitioner has overcome the grounds for denial articulated by the Director. 
The Petitioner is a U.S. subsidiary within a group of companies headquartered in Poland. The group 
has combined sales of $700 million and manufacturing facilities in four countries. The petitioning 
company was established for the purpose of introducing the company's products to the U.S. market, 
and the record substantiates that the Beneficiary's role as chief operating officer of the U.S. 
subsidiary involves oversight of foreign employees who are charged with supporting these efforts. 
We may consider employees of the wider multinational organization when assessing a petitioner's 
staffing needs and determining whether a beneficiary will be sufficiently relieved from performing 
operational and administrative duties. See Matter ql Z-A -. Inc., Adopted Decision 2016-02 (AAO 
Apr. 14, 2016). 
It appears that the Director misunderstood the Beneficiary's ongoing responsibility to oversee the 
foreign entity which led to the incorrect conclusion that the Beneficiary would not be providing 
services to the U.S. entity on a full-time basis. However, the Petitioner explained and documented 
that the foreign employees have been charged with supporting the design, development, 
manufacture, marketing, and export of new product lines custom-made tor the U.S. market and 
would do so under the Beneficiary's supervision. The roles filled by the 18 foreign staff members 
include legal, regulatory, corporate governance, product research and development, administrative, 
sales, patent and trademark, and logistics. 
In addition, the Petitioner employs full-time sales and administrative staff and a number of 
independent contractors who are able to relieve the Beneficiary from performing most of the nonΒ­
qualifying functions required for the U.S. subsidiary's day-to-day operation, given its current stage 
of development. 
Taking into account the contributions of the foreign staff~ U.S. staff, and contractors, we find that the 
record establishes that the Beneficiary would primarily perform executive duties and will direct a 
2 
Matter ofT-USA, Inc. 
major component or function of the organization, with limited supervision from the parent 
company's chief executive officer. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has established that the Beneficiary will be employed full-time in the United States in 
an executive capacity. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as Matter (~fT-USA, Inc., ID# 429951 (AAO June 22, 2017) 
3 
Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

Use this winning precedent in your petition

MeritDraft analyzes sustained AAO decisions like this one to generate petition arguments that mirror what actually gets approved.

Build Your Winning Petition →

No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.