sustained EB-1C Case: Oilfield Services

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 5476673 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : MAR. 5, 2020 
Form I-140, Petition for Multinational Managers or Executives 
The Petitioner , an oilfield equipment , tools , and service company , seeks to permanently employ the 
Beneficiary as its "Chairman" of the board of directors with an annual salary of $240,000 under the 
first preference immigrant classification for multinational executives or managers. See Immigration 
and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(C) , 8 U.S.C. § 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 revoked approval of the petition concluding that the 
Petitione r did not establish , as required , that the Beneficiary was employed abroad and would be 
employed in the United States in a managerial or executive capacity . With regard to the Beneficiary ' s 
foreign employment , the Director found that the Petitioner failed to provide an adequately detailed job 
description and certified translations of documents containing employee names and salary 
information . The Director also addressed the Beneficiary ' s proposed U.S. employment , finding that 
the Petitioner 's organizational chart "appears to be inflated" and pointed to the Petitioner's failure to 
execute its original plan of hiring ten employees in addition to those that were already working for the 
Petitioner at the time this petition was filed. 
On appeal, the Petitioner disputes the grounds for revocation , arguing that the Director did not 
adequately contemplate the additional evidence that was submitted in the NOIR response , which 
included supplemental information about the Beneficiary 's job duties, foreign documents , and the 
Petitioner's hiring plan and staffing. 
Upon de novo review , we find that the Director did not adequately consider the Petitioner 's claims and 
supporting evidence , which includes detailed descriptions of the Beneficiary's foreign and proposed 
job duties. The Petitioner explained how the Beneficiary directs the management of each organization 
and offered sufficient insight into the Beneficiary's top-most placement and his goal- and policy­
making role within the foreign and U.S. entities. Further , the Petitioner adequately addressed the 
Director 's concerns about the foreign staffing documents and explained why it did not execute its 
original hiring plan. The Petitioner also clarified the role of its staff in supporting the parent 
organization in China and provided critical information about the U.S.-based employees' multi­
functional roles within the U.S. entity, thereby offering sufficient information about Petitioner 's 
current staffing composition to support the finding that the Beneficiary would more likely than not 
perform primarily executive job duties. 
In sum, we find that the Petitioner has provided sufficient evidence that establishes by a preponderance 
of the evidence that the Beneficiary was and would more likely than not be employed in an executive 
capacity in his respective positions with the foreign and U.S. entities. In light of these findings, we 
will sustain the appeal. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
2