dismissed L-1A

dismissed L-1A Case: Import And Export

๐Ÿ“… Date unknown ๐Ÿ‘ค Company ๐Ÿ“‚ Import And Export

Decision Summary

The appeal was rejected on procedural grounds because it was improperly filed. The individual who submitted the appeal on behalf of the petitioner failed to provide evidence that they were a licensed attorney entitled to file the appeal. Since the filing was defective, the AAO did not address the merits of the case.

Criteria Discussed

Improperly Filed Appeal Unauthorized Representation

Sign up free to download the original PDF

View Full Decision Text
WIIII~"''''.''''topreventclearlyLUtwmanted
invuion of penonal privacy
PUBLICCOPY
U.s. Department of Homeland Security
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Room 3000
Washington, DC 20529
u.s.Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
File: SRC 0505051579 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: OCTO 2 2001
INRE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
Petition: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(L) ofthe Immigration
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.c. ยง 1101(a)(l5)(L)
IN BEHALF OF PETITIONER:
INSTRUCTIONS:
SELF-REPRESENTED
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.
~hief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
SRC 05 050 51579
Page 2
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas 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 rejected pursuant to 8
C.F.R. ยง 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A).
The petitioner seeks to extend the temporary employment of the beneficiary as its administrative operations
manager in the United States as an L-IA nonimmigrant intracompany transferee pursuant to section
101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and National ity Act (the Act), 8 U .S.c. ยง lI01(a)(l5)(L). The U.S .
petitioner, a corporation organized in the State of Florida, claims to be engaged in the import and export
business. The petitioner seeks to extend the beneficiary's stay for an additional two years. The director
denied the petition concluding that the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary will be employed in the
United States in a primarily managerial or executive capacity.
The appeal in this matter was filed on behalf of the petitioner by_e Form G-28, Notice
of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative , indicates~attorney and a member
in good standing of the bar of the Supreme Court of Florida. The proper authorities in that state , however ,
have no record of his admission to practice law. On April 23, 2007 , the AAO, via facsimile transmission,
requested evidence of_admission to practice law in the State of Florida pursuant to 8 C.F .R.
ยง292.4(a). As of the date of this decision, no response has been received.
An appeal filed by a person or entity not entitled to file it must be rejected as improperly filed. 8 C.F.R . ยง
l03.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(l). Despite the AAO 's request for evidence demonstrating that _ is an attorney
and in good standing of the bar of the Supreme Court of Florida as claimed on the Form G-28, the record is
devoid of such evidence . Therefore, the appeal must be rejected as improperly filed.
As the appeal was not properly filed, it will be rejected. 8 C.F.R. ยง 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(l).
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.
Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial

MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.

Avoid This in My Petition →

No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.