remanded EB-3 Case: E-Commerce

MATTER OF A-C- LLC 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JULY 26,2017 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, an electronic commerce company, seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a senior 
product manager. It requests his classification as a professional under the third-preference, 
immigrant category. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(3)(A)(ii), 
8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(3)(A)(ii). This employment-based, "EB-3" category allows a U.S. business to 
sponsor a foreign national with a bachelor's degree for lawful permanent resident (LPR) status. 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
prior use of the accompanying labor certification to obtain LPR status for the Beneficiary invalidated 
the certification. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that case law and regulations do not support the denial. 
Upon de novo review, we will withdraw the Director's decision and remand this matter for further 
consideration consistent with the following opinion. 
I. LAW 
) 
Employment-based immigration generally follows a three-step process. First, an employer tiles a 
labor certification application with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). See section 212(a)(5)(A)(i) 
of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(5)(A)(i). The DOL must certify that the United States lacks able, 
willing, qualified, and available workers for an offered position, and that employment of a foreign 
national will not hurt the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers with similar jobs. !d If the 
DOL certifies a position, the employer must then file an immigrant visa petition with U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). See section 204 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1154. Among other things, a· petitioner must demonstrate a beneficiary's satisfaction of the 
certified job requirements. Finally, if USCIS approves a petition, the foreign national may apply for 
an immigrant visa abroad or, if eligible, adjustment of status in the United States. See section 245 of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1255. 
Matter of A-C- LLC 
II. ANALYSIS 
A petition for a professional must generally include a valid labor certification. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(1)(3)(i). In this case, the Petitioner seeks to re-classify the Beneficiary using the same labor 
certification that accompanied a prior approved immigrant petition and formed the basis for the 
Beneficiary's adjustment of status.1 Because the Beneficiary's adjustment of status was approved, 
the Director concluded that the job opportunity certified in the labor certification no longer existed. 
See 20 C.F.R. § 656.30(c)(2) (stating that a labor certification remains valid only for the particular 
job opportunity stated on it). The Director therefore found that the labor certification was not valid 
for the immigrant petition in this case. 
However, the record indicates that eight days before the approval of the Beneficiary's adjustment of 
status application, USCIS received a letter from his attorney of record, withdrawing the tiling. See 
8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(6) (allowing an applicant's withdrawal of an application "at any time until a 
decision is issued by USCIS"). In prior petition proceedings, the Director stated that USCIS did not 
recognize the withdrawal because the agency did not "connect" the letter to the Beneficiary's tile 
until after the application's approval. 
The record indicates USCIS' receipt of the Beneficiary's withdrawal letter before the application's 
approval. The letter identified the application by its corresponding alien registration and receipt 
numbers, and clearly stated the applicant's withdrawal of the application. Thus, the record 
establishes the Beneficiary's withdrawal of his adjustment application before its approval. See 
Matter of Cintron, 16 I&N Dec. 9, 9 (BIA 1976) (barring adjudication of a benetit request after its 
withdrawal). 
Besides the labor certification's validity, the record does not indicate the Director's consideration of 
the petition's merits. We will therefore remand this matter. On remand, the Director should 
recognize the labor certification's validity, resume adjudication of the petition, and enter a new 
decision. 
III. CONCLUSION 
Contrary to the Director's decision, the record establishes the validity of the labor certification. The 
record, however, does not indicate consideration of the petition's remaining merits. 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for further 
proceedings consistent with the foregoing decision and for the entry of a new decision. 
Cite as Matter of A-C- LLC, ID# 122898 (AAO July 26, 2017) 
1 
The Beneficiary subsequently voluntarily abandoned his LPR status. 
2