dismissed
L-1A
dismissed L-1A Case: 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
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →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.
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.