dismissed L-1A Case: Construction Equipment Export

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF 4RR-E-l- CORP 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: NOV. 15, 2018 
MOTION ON ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS OFFICE DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, described as an exporter of construction equipment, seeks to continue the 
Beneficiary's temporary employment as its general manager under the L-lA nonimmigrant 
classification for intracompany transferees. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 
lOl(a)(lS)(L), 8 U.S.C. § l lOl(a)(lS)(L).· The L-IA classification allows a corporation or other 
legal entity (including its affiliate or subsidiary) to transfer a qualifying foreign employee to the 
United States to work temporarily in a managerial or executive capacity. 
The Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish, as required, that the Petitioner will employ the Beneficiary in a managerial or executive 
capacity. We then denied two consecutive motions - first, a motion to reopen and later, a motion to 
reconsider. The matter is now before us on a motion to reopen. 
On motion, the Petitioner provides a "Statement of Jurisdiction" explaining how it met all basic 
filing requirements. It also offers additional evidence in support of the motion to reopen. 
Upon review, we will deny the motion to reopen. 
I. REQUIREMENTS FOR A MOTION TO REOPEN 
A motion to reopen is based on documentary evidence of new facls. The requirements of a motion 
to reopen are located at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2). Reasserting previously stated facts or resubmitting 
previously provided evidence does not constitute "new facts." 1 We may grant a motion that satisfies 
these requir~ments and demonstrates eligibility for the requested immigration benefit. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.S(a)(l )(i) limits our authority to reopen the proceeding to instances 
where the Petitioner has shown "proper cause" for that action. Thus, to merit reopening, a petitioner 
must not only meet the formal filing requirements (such as submission of a properly completed Form 
1 We note that the Petitioner has submitted several documents containing information that was previously submitted prior 
to the denial, in support of the appeal, or in support of its previously filed motions. While we have reviewed and 
considered all of the evidence submitted in support of the instant motion, only evidence that was not previously 
submitted will be specifically addressed in this decision. 
Marter of 4RR-E-l- Corp . 
. I-2908, Notice of Appeaf or Motion, with the correct fee), but also show proper cause for granting 
the motion. We cannot grant a motion that does not meet applicable requirements. See 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.5(a)(4). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The primary issue in this matter is whether the Petitioner has submitted new relevant facts, supported 
by credible evidence, to overcome the adverse findings in our prior decision denying the motion to 
reconsider. 2 The Petitioner must establish that all eligibility requirements for the immigration 
benefit have been satisfied from the time of the filing (in this case, August 20 I 6) and continuing 
through adjudication. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l). 
As a preliminary matter, we note that the review of any motion is narrowly limited to the basis for 
the prior adverse decision. Here, the subject of the prior decision was limited to our denial of the 
Petitioner's motion to reconsider. Thus, the new facts in support of the instant motion must address 
the specific basis for our denial of the Petitioner's motion to reconsider. Here, however, the 
Petitioner offers evidence that addresses the basis for Director's original denial of the petition rather 
than our reasons for denying the motion to reconsider. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not offered new facts that are relevant to the issue of its eligibility at 
the time of filing. Although the current motion includes newly submitted evidence in the form of 
2017 tax documents and an updated organizational chart that reflects employees hired after the filing 
of the petition, such evidence is not relevant for the purpose of establishing the Petitioner's 
eligibility at the time of.filing and therefore it will not be addressed. The Petitioner also offers a 
company letter, employee job duty breakdowns, and a "Certification Letter" in support of this 
motion. However, all three documents are identical in content to evidencf:: that was previously 
provided at various stages in the proceeding. As these submissions offer no new facts, the do not 
meet the requirements of a motion to reopen. 
III. CONCLUSION 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not shown proper cause for reopening. 
ORDER: The motion to reopen is denied. 
Cite as Matter cf 4RR-E-I- Corp., ID# 18 I 5828 (AAO Nov. I 5, 2018) 
2 A motion to reconsider must establish that we based our decision on an incorrect application of law or policy and that 
the decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record of proceedings at the time of the decision. A petitioner 
must support its motion to reconsider with a pertinent precedent or adopted decision, statutory or regulatory provision, or 
statement of U.S. Citizenship and hrimigration Services (USCIS) or Department of Homeland Security policy. 8 C.F.R. 
§ I 03.5(a)(3). 
2