dismissed L-1A Case: Almond Processing And Packaging

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N W , Rm. A3000 
Wash~ngtcn, DC 20523 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
b7 
File: WAC 05 007 50127 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: DEC 
 5 2008 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
Petition: 
 Petition for a onimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationali $ Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 10 1 (a)(15)(L) 
IN BEHALF OF PETLTIONEI~: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the A 
 inistrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originaIly decid "f d your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
- - "-4 
e* 
 "- *I-- 
.e;" 
RO~~P. Wiernann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 05 007 50127 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The 
 Service Center, denied the petition for a nonimmigrant visa. The 
matter is now before 
 Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will dismiss the appeal. 
The petitioner filed ths nonibmigrant visa petition seeking to employ the beneficiary in the position of 
managing partner as an L-1A $onimmigrant intracompany transferee pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(L) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1 IOl(a)(lS)(L). The petitioner is allegedly a 
partnership formed under the laws of the State of California and engaged in the business of almond 
processing and packaging. The director denied the petition concluding that the petitioner did not establish 
that the beneficiary will be employed primarily in an executive or managerial capacity. 
The petitioner filed an appeal. ?he director declined to treat the appeal as a motion and forwarded the appeal 
to the AAO for review. 
A review of Citizenship and Iiqmgration Services records indicates that this beneficiary is also the beneficiary of 
an approved immigrant petition bd has adjusted status to that of a permanent resident on June 5,2006. While the 
petitioner has not withdrawn tlje appeal in this proceeding, it would appear that the beneficiary is presently a 
permanent resident and the issuqs in this proceeding are moot. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is disrnisbed as moot.