dismissed L-1A Case: Health Supplements

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 06844493 
Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
The Petitioner, an importer/exporter of health supplements and other merchandise, seeks to continue 
the Beneficiary's temporary employment as its president and general manager under the L-lA 
nonimmigrant classification for intracompany transferees. Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) 
section 101(a)(15)(L), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(L). The L-lA 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 on the ground that the Petitioner did 
not establish that the Beneficiary would be employed in a managerial or executive capacity. The 
Petitioner filed an appeal stating that a brief and/or additional evidence was attached, but in fact no 
such materials accompanied the appeal form. Accordingly, the Director summarily dismissed the 
appeal in accordance with 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v), which provides for the summary dismissal of an 
appeal if the appellant fails to specifically identify any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of 
fact for the appeal. The Petitioner filed a combined motion to reopen and reconsider, along with some 
materials on the production and commercialization of food supplement products, the Petitioner's 
organizational chart, and the Beneficiary's job duties. 
A motion to reopen must state new facts and be supported by documentary evidence. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.5(a)(2). A motion to reconsider must establish that our decision was based 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. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). We may grant a motion that satisfies 
these requirements and demonstrates eligibility for the requested immigration benefit. 
We dismissed the combined motion, pointing out that it incorrectly focused on the Director's denial 
of the petition rather than our summary dismissal of the appeal. In dismissing the motion to reopen 
we found that the Petitioner did not provide new facts supported by documentary evidence that 
addressed our previous decision to summarily dismiss the appeal. In dismissing the motion to 
reconsider we found that the Petitioner had not identified any incorrect application of law or policy in 
our summary dismissal decision. We concluded that the Petitioner had not overcome the grounds for 
the appellate dismissal. 
The matter is now before us on a second combined motion to reopen and reconsider. The Petitioner 
asserts that the previous decisions issued by the Director and by this office were legally erroneous 
because the record establishes that the Beneficiary will be employed in a managerial or executive 
capacity. The Petitioner submits new evidence in the form of an approval notice from the Nebraska 
Service Center showing that its immigrant petition on behalf of the Beneficiary, seeking to employ 
him in the status of a multinational executive or manager under section 203(b)(l)(C) of the Act,1 was 
recently approved. According to the Petitioner, since the Nebraska Service Center found that the 
Beneficiary will be working in a managerial capacity as the Petitioner's president and general 
manager, we and the Vermont Service Center misapplied governing law and policy by not approving 
the nonimmigrant petition as well. We disagree. 
Regardless of the Nebraska Service Center's decision on the immigrant petition, the issues before us 
in the current combined motion to reopen the instant proceeding and reconsider our previous decisions 
on the nonimmigrant petition are whether we incorrectly applied the governing law or policy, or failed 
to take new facts and evidence into account. We note that the approval of the immigrant petition by 
the Nebraska Service Center post-dated our summary dismissal of the appeal of the nonimmigrant 
petition's denial based on the Petitioner's failure to specifically identify any erroneous conclusion of 
law or statement of fact in the Director's decision. The Petitioner has offered no explanation or excuse 
for its failure to submit any legal rationale or evidence in support of its appeal. Thus, the Petitioner 
has still not demonstrated that our original decision to summarily dismiss the appeal was erroneous. 
For the reasons discussed above, the Petitioner has not shown proper cause for reopening or 
reconsideration. 
ORDER: The motion to reopen is dismissed. 
FURTHER MOTION: The motion to reconsider is dismissed. 
1 The receipt number of the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, isl~----~ 
2