dismissed L-1A Case: Automotive Parts

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
~dentif~lng data deletea to 
prevent clearly unwarrantd 
;nvasion of oersonal privacy 
PUBLIC COPY 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: WAC 04 130 54293 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: JUL 0 7 2006 
IN RE: 
 Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1101(a)(15)(L) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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. 
, e Ro ert P. Wiemann, hief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
b 
WAC 04 130 54293 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California 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 summarily 
dismissed. 
The petitioner is a California corporation that claims to be engaged in the importation and wholesale of new 
and refurbished automotive parts, supplies and accessories. It seeks to extend its authorization to temporarily 
employ the beneficiary as its president pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1101(a)(15)(L). The director denied the petition concluding that the petitioner had 
not established that the beneficiary would be employed in a primarily managerial or executive capacity under 
the extended petition. 
The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal on November 12, 2004. The director declined to treat the appeal 
as a motion and forwarded the appeal to the AAO for review. On the Form I-290B Notice of Appeal, counsel 
for the petitioner indicated that he would send a brief and/or evidence to the AAO within 30 days. Counsel 
did not state the reason for the appeal on the Form I-290B. As no additional evidence has been incorporated 
into the record, the AAO contacted counsel by facsimile on April 28, 2006 to request that counsel 
acknowledge whether the brief and/or evidence were timely submitted, and, if applicable, to afford counsel an 
opportunity to re-submit the documents. To date, no response has been received. Accordingly, the record is 
now complete. 
To establish eligibility under section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Act, the petitioner must meet certain criteria. 
Specifically, within three years preceding the beneficiary's application for admission into the United States, a 
firm, corporation, or other legal entity, or an affiliate or subsidiary thereof, must have employed the 
beneficiary for one continuous year. Furthermore, the beneficiary must seek to enter the United States 
temporarily to continue rendering his or her services to the same employer or a subsidiary or affiliate thereof 
in a managerial, executive, or specialized knowledge capacity. 
Regulations at 8 C.F.R. fj 103.3(a)(l)(v) state, in pertinent part: 
An officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily dismiss any appeal when the party 
concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of 
fact for the appeal. 
Upon review, the AAO concurs with the director's decision and affirms the denial of the petition. 
In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely with the 
petitioner. 
 Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1361. Inasmuch as the petitioner has failed to identify 
specifically an erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of fact in support of the appeal, the petitioner has 
not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is summarily dismissed.