L-1A Dismissed — Automotive (2006): the petitioner failed to specifically identify any

Decision Summary

The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner failed to specifically identify any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the appeal, as required by regulations. The AAO concurred with the director's findings that the petitioner had not established that the beneficiary would be employed in a managerial/executive capacity or that the U.S. company was actually doing business at the time of filing.

Criteria Discussed

Sign up free to download the original PDF