remanded
EB-3
remanded EB-3 Case: Physical Therapy
Decision Summary
The Director denied the petition because the Petitioner was subject to a one-year mandatory debarment by the Department of Labor. The AAO withdrew the Director's decision and remanded the case because the petition had been pending for several years and was adjudicated significantly outside of normal USCIS processing times, instructing the Director to re-evaluate the petition on its merits.
Criteria Discussed
Petitioner Debarment Schedule A Occupation Processing Delays
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
MATTER OF A-T-, INC. Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office DATE: SEPT. 8, 2016 APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION PETITION: FORM I -140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER The Petitioner, a staffing business, seeks to permanently employ the Beneficiary as a physical therapist under the immigrant classification of professional. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(3)(A)(ii), 8 U.S.C. Β§ 1153(b)(3)(A)(ii). This employment-based immigrant classification allows U.S. employers to sponsor qualified immigrants who hold baccalaureate degrees and who are members of the professions. The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the petition based on a finding by the Department of Labor (DOL) that the Petitioner had engaged in certain actions rendering it subject to mandatory debarment under sections 212(n)(2)(C) and/or (E) of the Act. The Director determined that none of the Petitioner's immigrant visa petitions would be approved for a period of 1 year, and denied the instant petition during the 1-year debarment period. The matter is now before us on appeal. Upon de novo review, we will withdraw the Director's decision and remand the case to the Director for further proceedings and the issuance of a new decision. I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY The instant petition, filed on July 27, 2007, is for a Schedule A, Group I, occupation. A Schedule A occupation is one codified at 20 C.F.R. Β§ 656.5(a) for which DOL has determined that there are not sufficient U.S. workers who are able, willing, qualified, and available, and that the wages and working conditions of similarly employed U.S. workers will not be adversely affected by the employment of foreign nationals in such occupations. The current list of Schedule A occupations includes professional physical therapists. !d. Petitions for Schedule A occupations do not require a petitioner to test the labor market and obtain a certified ETA Form 9089, Application for Permanent Employment Certification, from DOL prior to filing the petition with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Instead, the petition is filed directly with USCIS with an uncertified ETA Form 9089, in duplicate. See 8 C.F.R. Β§Β§ 204.5(a)(2) and (1)(3)(i); see also 20 C.F.R. Β§ 656.15. In accord with these provisions, the instant petition was filed with duplicate uncertified ETA Forms 9089. The priority date of the petition is Matter of A-T-, Inc. "the date the completed, signed petition (including all initial evidence and the correct fee) is properly filed with [USCIS]." 8 C.F.R. Β§ 204.5(d). The Director denied the petition on May 6, 2015, indicating that its decision was based on a finding by DOL that the Petitioner had engaged in certain actions rendering it subject to mandatory debarment under sections 212(n)(2)(C) and/or (E) of the Act. The denial decision was issued during the 1-year debarment period that ran from August 1, 2014, to July 31,2015. The Petitioner filed a motion to reconsider on June 8, 2015. In a decision issued on October 7, 2015, the Director found that the grounds for denial had not been overcome and affirmed his original denial of the petition. The Petitioner then filed a motion to reopen on October 29, 2015, which the Director dismissed on January 12, 2016. The Petitioner filed the instant appeal on February 8, 2016. II. CONCLUSION Because the Director's decision dated May 6, 2015, appears to have been adjudicated after several years pending and significantly outside of normal US CIS processing times, we will withdraw the Director's decision and remand the matter to the Director for consideration of the petition on the merits and the issuance of a new decision. ORDER: The decision of the Director, Nebraska Service Center, dated May 6, 2015, is withdrawn. The matter is remanded to the Director, Nebraska Service Centβ¬r, for further proceedings consistent with the foregoing decision and for the entry of a new decision. Cite as Matter of A-T-, Inc., ID# 17999 (AAO Sept. 8, 2016) 2
Draft your EB-3 petition with AAO precedents
MeritDraft uses real AAO decisions to generate compliant petition arguments tailored to your evidence.
Sign Up Free →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.