L-1A Dismissed — Hair And Nail Salon (2005): the petitioner failed to specifically identify an erroneous

Decision Summary

The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner failed to specifically identify an erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the original decision. The AAO concurred with the director's finding that the petitioner failed to establish the beneficiary would be employed in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity, as her duties were primarily related to the daily operations of the business and she appeared to be a first-line supervisor of non-professional personnel.

Criteria Discussed

Sign up free to download the original PDF