dismissed L-1A Case: Electronics Distribution

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PUBLIC COPy 
File: 
IN RE: 
WAC 08 005 52577 Office: CALIFORNLA SERVICE CENTER Date: 
 29m 
Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
Petition: 
 Petition for a Nonirnrnigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 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. 
/Robert P. ~iemann, dhief 
/; Administrative Appeals Office 
1 
WAC 08 005 52577 
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 filed this nonimmigrant petition seeking to employ the beneficiary as an L-1A nonirnmigrant 
intracompany transferee pursuant to section 1 0 1 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 
U.S.C. 5 1101(a)(15)(L). The petitioner is a corporation organized in the State of California that intends to 
operate as an electronics distributor. The petitioner states that it is a subsidiary of Elim Electronics Co., Ltd., 
located in Busan, Korea. The petitioner seeks to open a new office in the United States and has requested that 
the beneficiary be granted a three-year period in L-1A classification to serve as its branch president.' 
The director denied the petition on April 2,2008, concluding that the petitioner had failed to establish that the 
beneficiary possesses at least one continuous year of fill-time employment with the foreign entity within the 
three years preceding the filing of the petition. In denying the petition, the director noted that the petitioner 
had failed to respond to a request for copies of the beneficiary's payroll records and date of hire with the 
foreign entity. 
The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal. The director declined to treat the appeal as a motion and 
forwarded the appeal to the AAO for review. On appeal, the.petitioner submits the beneficiary's "payroll tax 
records" for the period January 1, 2006 to December 3 1, 2007, and monthly payroll records for the period 
from January 2008 to April 2008. Counsel for the petitioner requests that the petition be approved based on 
this evidence. 
To establish eligibility for the L-1 nonirnrnigrant visa classification, the petitioner must meet the criteria 
outlined in section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Act. Specifically, a qualifying organization must have employed the 
beneficiary in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity, or in a specialized knowledge capacity, for one 
continuous year within three years preceding the beneficiary's application for admission into the United 
States. In addition, 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. 5 103.3(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 affums the denial of the petition. On appeal, 
the petitioner has not identified an erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact on the part of the director. 
Rather, the petitioner submits evidence that was previously requested and should have been submitted in 
response to a request for evidence that was issued on December 5,2007. 
------ 
I 
 Pursuant to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(1)(7)(A)(1)(3), if the beneficiary is corning to the United 
States to open or to be employed in a new office, the petition may be approved for a period not to exceed one 
year. 
WAC 08 005 52577 
Page 3 
The petition will be denied for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an independent and 
alternative basis for denial. When the AAO denies a petition on multiple alternative grounds, a plaintiff can 
succeed on a challenge only if she shows that the AAO abused it discretion with respect to all of the AAO's 
enumerated grounds. See Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d at 1043. 
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. § 1361. Inasmuch as the petitioner has not identified specifically 
an erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in support of the appeal, the appeal must be summarily 
dismissed. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is summarily dismissed.