dismissed L-1A Case: Business

identify in y data Gcl rki! id 
prevent clealy unwarranko 
invasion of personal privacy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
File: SRC 02 169 5 1604 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: A~R Q 2 ~2009 
Petition: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 8 1 10 1 (a)(15)(L) 
IN 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. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to have 
considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. !$ 103.5 for 
the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided your case by 
filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. !$ 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
John F. ~r&om, Acting Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
d. SRC 02 169 51604 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the petition for a nonimrnigrant visa. The matter 
is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will dismiss the appeal. 
The petitioner filed this nonirnrnigrant visa petition seeking to extend the employment of its president as an L- 
1 A nonimmigrant intracompany transferee pursuant to section 1 O 1 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1 101 (a)(15)(L). The petitioner is a limited liability company organized 
under the laws of the State of Georgia. The director denied the petition concluding that the petitioner failed to 
establish that the beneficiary will be employed in a primarily managerial or executive capacity in the United 
States. 
The petitioner filed an appeal. The director declined to treat the appeal as a motion and forwarded the appeal 
to the AAO for review. 
A review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services records indicates that this beneficiary is also the 
beneficiary of an approved immigrant petition and has adjusted status to that of a permanent resident on January 
12, 2007 (SRC 05 029 50078). While the petitioner has not withdrawn the appeal in this proceeding, it would 
appear that the beneficiary is presently a permanent resident and the issues in this proceeding are moot. 
Therefore, this appeal is dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed as moot.