dismissed L-1A Case: Import/Export

identifyingdata deletedto
preventclearly unw~ted
invasionofpersonalpnvacy
PUBLIC Copy
u.s.Department of Homeland Security
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W. Rm. A3000
Washington .Dt,' 20529
u.s.Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
FILE: WAC 02 145 52841 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: AUG 0 2 20 0 6
INRE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section lOl(a)(15)(L) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § IIOI(a)(15)(L)
ON BEHALF OF BENEFICIARY:
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.
--;2
~ · · ' · ' ·· :/::~:'-,=5 · ··~
RobertPrWiemann, Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
WAC 02 145 52841
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
rejected pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § l03.3(a)(2)(v)(A).
The petitioner states that it is engaged in import, export, wholesale, and trading. It seeks to extend the
employment of its chief executive officer/president as a nonimmigrant intracompany transferee pursuant
to § lOl(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 110l(a)(15)(L). The director denied
the petition based on the conclusion that the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary would be
employed in a primarily managerial or executive capacity.
The appeal was filed by an attorney who had not previously entered his appearance in this matter.' The
Form G-28, Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative, that was submitted for the record was
submitted on behalf of and signed by the beneficiary, not by the petitioner or by someone acting as an
authorized representative of the petitioner. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) regulations
specifically prohibit a beneficiary of a visa petition, or a representative acting on a beneficiary's behalf,
from filing a petition; the beneficiary of a visa petition is not a recognized party in a proceeding. 8 C.F.R.
§ l03.2(a)(3). As the beneficiary and her representative are not recognized parties, counsel is not
authorized to file an appeal. 8 C.F.R. § l03.3(a)(1)(iii)(B).
As the appeal was not properly filed, it will be rejected. 8 C.F .R. § l03.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(1).
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.
1 It is noted for the record that on appeal, counsel for the petitioner indicated on Form 1-290B that it
would submit a brief and/or additional evidence to address the director's denial within thirty days. On
June 26, 2006, the AAO as a courtesy sent a fax to counsel for the beneficiary, advising him that no
evidence or brief had ever been received in this matter and requested that counsel submit a copy of the
brief and/or additional evidence, if in fact such evidence had been submitted, within five business days.
Upon further review of the file, it appears that the requested brief was received on October 31, 2002 but
overlooked by the AAO upon initial review of the file. However, since the appeal was improperly filed
by the beneficiary, this issue is moot.