sustained EB-1C Case: Retail

, 
identltying data deietoo to 
prevent clearly unwarr~ted 
invasion of personal pnvacy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
u. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PUBLlCCOPY 
DATE: JUL 25 201l OFFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER FILE:_ 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
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. § 11S3(b)(I)(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. 
Thank you, 
Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The preference visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska Service Center. 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withdrawn and the appeal will be sustained.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 operating in the United States as a retailer of doors and moldings. 
Accordingly, the petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as an employment-based immigrant pursuant 
to section 203(b)(\)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.c. § I I 53(b)(\)(C), as a 
multinational executive or manager. In denying the petition, the director found that the petitioner failed to 
establish that the beneficiary would be employed in the United States in a qualifying managerial or executive 
capacity. 
On appeal, counsel submits an appellate brief disputing the director's findings and providing additional, more 
detailed information about the beneficiary's proposed employment with the U.S. entity. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states in pertinent part: 
(\) 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 I 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. 
While the director was correct to consider the petitioner's organizational hierarchy in assessing the 
beneficiary's eligibility for the immigrant classification sought herein, staffing should be considered in light 
of the beneficiary's job duties and the petitioner's own organizational needs based on the type of business it 
operates. 
After reviewing the relevant evidence and information and considering the additional details that have been 
provided in support of the appeal, the AAO finds that the petitioning entity is adequately staffed and 
sufficiently complex in its staffmg composition to relieve the beneficiary from having to allocate his time 
primarily to the performance of non-qualifying tasks. Although the AAO acknowledges that the beneficiary 
would allocate some of his time to the performance of certain non-qualifying tasks, there is no statute or 
regulation that requires the beneficiary to allocate 100% of his time exclusively to job duties that are within a 
managerial or executive capacity. An employee who "primarily" performs the tasks necessary to produce a 
product or to provide services is not considered to be "primarily" employed in a managerial or executive 
Page 3 
capacity. See sections 101(a)(44)(A) and (B) of the Act (requiring that one "primarily" perform the 
enumerated managerial or executive duties); see also Matter of Church Scientology International, 19 I&N 
Dec. 593, 604 (Comm. 1988). The AAO finds that proper consideration of the beneficiary's job duties within 
the context of an adequately staffed organization indicates that the beneficiary would be relieved from having 
to allocate the primary portion of his time to those daily operational tasks that fall outside the definition of 
managerial or executive capacity. 
Accordingly, the AAO concludes that the petitioner has overcome the director's adverse findings. As the 
record does not show any other grounds for finding the petitioner ineligible, the AAO finds that approval of 
the petition is warranted. 
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 has met that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained.