dismissed L-1A Case: Automotive Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 19619183 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for L-lA Manager or Executive 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : FEB. 11, 2022 
The Petitioner, an automotive finance subsidiary of a major automotive manufacturing group, seeks to 
continue the Beneficiary's temporary employment as its chief financial officer under the L-lA 
nonimmigrant classification for intracompany transferees. Section 101 ( a)(l 5)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(L). 
The Director of the California Service Center approved the petition but denied the Petitioner's request 
to extend the Beneficiary's L-lA status. The Director determined that the Beneficiary was ineligible 
for the extension of status because U.S . Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) arrival and 
departure records show that he was not physically present in the United States at the time the Petitioner 
filed the Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker. 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the Beneficiary was physically present in the United States at 
the time of filing and did not depart while the Form 1-129 was pending. The Petitioner submits 
evidence in support of this claim and asserts that the Director erred by not granting the requested 
extension of status . However, we lack jurisdiction over this matter and will reject the appeal. 
The authority to adjudicate appeals is delegated to us by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS) pursuant to the authority vested in him through the Homeland Security Act 
of 2002, Pub. L. 107-296. See DHS Delegation Number 0150.1 (effective March 1, 2003); see also 8 
C.F.R. § 2 .1 (2003) . The regulations limit our jurisdiction over petitions for temporary workers to 
those described under 8 C.F.R. §§ 214.2 and 214.6. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.l(f)(3)(iii)(J) (2003). 
The regulations state that, while a petitioner's request to classify a beneficiary as an L-1 nonimmigrant 
and to extend a beneficiary's stay are combined in the Form 1-129, a separate determination must be 
made by the director on each issue. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(15)(i). Although a request for an extension 
of stay in L-lA status is made on Form 1-129, it is not a petition within the meaning of section 214(c)(l) 
of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1184( c )(1 ), and thus, does not confer any of the appeal rights normally associated 
with a petition. The Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, in this context is merely the 
vehicle by which information is collected to make a determination on the application for an extension 
of status . See 8 C.F.R. § 214.l(c)(l). 
There is no provision in the regulations for an appeal from a denial of an extension of status request 
filed on Form I-129. 8 C.F.R. § 214.l(c)(S). Further, the Director's decision on an extension of status 
request, and all issues surrounding that decision, are within the sole discretion of the Director. Id. 
However, subject to the governing regulations and the limits on the individual's period of stay, the 
Petitioner may seek further extensions. 
For the reasons discussed above, we have no jurisdiction over this matter. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected. 
2