dismissed L-1A Case: Automotive Care

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.. Rm. A3000 
identifying dm dew to 
dearly UIIWW~~ 
,&on of personal privacy 
PUBLIC COPY 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Petition: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 l(a)(l S)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1 10 1 (a)(l S)(L) 
IN BEHALF OF BENEFICIARY: 
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. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
SRC 05 045 5 1794 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the petition for a nonimmigrant visa. The matter 
is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected pursuant to 8 
C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A). 
The petitioner seeks to extend the temporary employment of the beneficiary as its presidentlexecutive 
manager in the United States as an L-IA nonimmigrant intracompany transferee pursuant to section 
101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 9 1101(a)(15)(L). The U.S. 
petitioner, a corporation organized in the State of Florida, operates an automotive care clinic and claims to be 
the affiliate o ocated in Brampton, Ontario, Canada. The director denied the petition 
concluding th stablish that the beneficiary will be employed in the United States in a 
primarily managerial or executive capacity. 
The appeal in this matter was accompanied by a newly-executed Form G-28, Entry of Appearance as 
Attorney or Representative dated April 5, 2005. This form was not signed by the petitioner or an authorized 
representative thereof, but rather by the beneficiary, who noted on the Form G-28 that the form was filed on 
her behalf. It is noted for the record that, while the beneficiary does appear to have been an agent for the 
petitioner, there is no evidence in the record that the beneficiary was legally authorized to sign the Form G-28 
as a representative on behalf of the petitioner with regard to the appeal before the AAO. Specifically, the 
Form G-28 submitted by counsel clearly limits her representation/appearance to the beneficiary, and nowhere 
is it indicated that the beneficiary signed the form in her capacity as president for the petitioner.' 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) regulations specifically prohibit a beneficiary of a visa petition, 
or a representative acting on a beneficiary's behalf, from filing a petition; the beneficiary of a visa petition is 
not a recognized party in a proceeding. 8 C.F.R. 3 103.2(a)(3). As the beneficiary and her representative are 
not recognized parties, counsel is not authorized to file an appeal, and it must therefore be rejected. 8 C.F.R. 
5 103.3(a)(l)(iii)(B); 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(I). 
As the appeal was not properly filed, it will be rejected. 8 C.F.R. 5 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(I) 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected. 
1 
 It is further noted for the record that the Forms G-28 previously submitted for the record also limit counsel's 
appearance/representation to the beneficiary in this matter.