dismissed L-1A Case: Business

identifyingdatadeleted~
preventclearlyunw~
invasionofpersonalpn'V~
M.§iI)epa;J"tmentofHomeland SeCuritY
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. A3000
Washington, DC 20529
us,Citizenship.
and hnmigration
Serv:iCes
, PUBLICCOpy
File: WAC 06 056 52805 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date:
))1
MAR c$ ZOO/
IN RE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
Petition: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section lOl(a)(15)(L) ofthe Immigration
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § llOl(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.
~"-:J:::::;'''-'
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.llscis.gov
~ , .
WAC 06 056 52805
Page 2
DISC.USSION : 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 AAO will dismiss the appeal.
. The petitioner filed this nonimmigrant visa petition seeking to extend the employment of the beneficiary in
the position of vice president as an L-l A nonimmigrant intracompany transferee pursuant to section
101(a)(l5)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U .S.c. § 1101(a)(l5)(L). The petitioner is
a corporation organized under the laws of the State of California. The director denied the petition concluding
that the petitioner did not establish that it and the foreign entity have a qualifying relationship.
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 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 res ident on September 26, 2006 .
While the petitioner has not withdrawn the appeal in this proceeding , it would appear that the beneficiary is
presently apermanent resident and the issues in thisproceeding are moot. Therefore , this appeal is dismissed.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed as moot.