dismissed L-1A Case: International Trade

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 13477495 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for L-lA Manager or Executive 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: DEC. 28, 2020 
The Petitioner, an international trading company, seeks to continue the Beneficiary's temporary 
employment as its chief financial officer (CFO) under the L-lA classification for nonimmigrant 
intracompany transferees. 1 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 California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did 
not establish, as required, that it would employ the Beneficiary in a managerial or executive capacity. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. See 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, the Petitioner has not met this burden. 
Accordingly, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
To establish eligibility for the L-lA nonimmigrant visa classification, a qualifying organization must 
have employed the beneficiary in a managerial or executive capacity for one continuous year within 
three years preceding the beneficiary's application for admission into the United States. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(1)(3)(v)(B). In addition, the beneficiary must seek to enter the United States temporarily to 
continue rendering his or her services to the same employer or a subsidiary or affiliate thereof in a 
managerial or executive capacity. Id. 
A petitioner seeking to extend an L-1 A petition that involved a new office must submit a statement of 
the beneficiary's duties during the previous year and under the extended petition; a statement 
1 The Petitioner previously filed a "new office" petition on the Beneficiaiy 's behalf which was approved for the period 
September 27, 2018, until September 26, 2019. A "new office" is an organization that has been doing business in the 
United States through a parent, branch, affiliate, or subsidiary for less than one year. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(l)(l)(ii)(F) . The 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(3)(v)(C) allows a "new office" operation one year within the date of approval of the 
petition to support an executive or managerial position . 
describing the staffing of the new operation and evidence of the numbers and types of positions held; 
evidence of its financial status; evidence that it has been doing business for the previous year; and 
evidence that it maintains a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary's foreign employer. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(1)(14)(ii). 
II. U.S. EMPLOYMENT IN AN EXECUTIVE CAPACITY 
The sole issue to be addressed is whether the Petitioner established that it would employ the 
Beneficiary in an executive capacity under the extended petition. Although the Director also 
considered whether the Beneficiary would be employed in a managerial capacity as defined at section 
101(a)(44)(A) of the Act, the Petitioner has not claimed that the Beneficiary's position is managerial 
in nature. 
"Executive capacity" means an assignment within an organization in which the employee primarily 
directs the management of the organization or a major component or function of the organization; 
establishes the goals and policies of the organization, component, or function; exercises wide latitude 
in discretionary decision-making; and receives only general supervision or direction from higher-level 
executives, the board of directors, or stockholders of the organization. Section 101 (a)( 44 )(B) of the 
Act. 
When examining the executive capacity of a given beneficiary, we will look to the petitioner's 
description of the job duties. See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(3)(ii). Beyond the required description of the 
job duties, we examine the company's organizational structure, the duties of a beneficiary's 
subordinate employees, the presence of other employees to relieve a beneficiary from performing 
operational duties, the nature of the business, and any other factors that will contribute to 
understanding a beneficiary's actual duties and role in a business. 
Accordingly, we will discuss evidence regarding the Beneficiary's job duties along with evidence of 
the nature of the Petitioner's business, its staffing levels, and its organizational structure. 
A. Duties 
To be eligible for L-lA nonimmigrant visa classification as an executive, the Petitioner must show 
that the Beneficiary will perform the high-level responsibilities set forth in the statutory definition at 
section 101(a)(44)(B)(i)-(iv) of the Act. If the record does not establish that the offered position meets 
all four of these elements, we cannot conclude that it is a qualifying executive position. 
If the Petitioner establishes that the offered position meets all elements set forth in the statutory 
definition, the Petitioner must prove that the Beneficiary will be primarily engaged in executive duties, 
as opposed to ordinary operational activities alongside the Petitioner's other employees. See Family 
Inc. v. USCIS, 469 F.3d 1313, 1316 (9th Cir. 2006). In determining whether a given beneficiary's 
duties will be primarily executive, we consider the petitioner's description of the job duties, the 
company's organizational structure, the duties of a beneficiary's subordinate employees, the presence 
of other employees to relieve the beneficiary from performing operational duties, the nature of the 
2 
business, and any other factors that will contribute to understanding a beneficiary's actual duties and 
role in a business. 
The Petitioner stated it was formed in 2018 and is engaged in international trade, specifically the 
distribution of health products. At the time of filing, the Petitioner claimed to have 10 employees and 
$811,860 in gross earnings, and stated that the Beneficiary would be compensated $60,000 annually. 
The Petitioner's organizational chart indicates that the organization is divided into three departments: 
sales, marketing, and purchasing, and the Beneficiary will directly supervise the three corresponding 
managers of each department. The Petitioner indicated that the Beneficiary has performed and will 
continue to perform the following duties as CFO: 
• Develop the organization's overall financial accounting and financial 
management systems; 
• [D]evelop the financial procedures and standards, and budget management; 
• Establish company's financial and accounting policies, goals, and objectives; 
• Develop financial business plans and forecasts; 
• Oversee financing strategies and activities, as well as banking relationships; 
• Prepare financial statements; 
• Review financial statements to determine progress and status in attaining 
objectives; formulate planning recommendations to the board of directors; 
• Develop and implement finance, accounting, billing, and auditing procedures; 
• Oversee each department to ensure proper maintenance of all accounting 
systems and function; etc. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner provided the following 
expanded overview of the Beneficiary's duties, along with the percentages of time he would devote to 
each area of duties: 
1. Develop and adjust the organization's overall financial accounting and financial 
management systems; Responsible for the company's present financial condition, 
taking into consideration risk and liquidity; Identify and report what areas of a 
company are most efficient and how the company can capitalize on this 
information; develop the financial procedures under standards, and budget 
management; Establish and adjust companies financial and accounting policies, 
goals, and objectives; Develop or adjust financial business plans and forecasts; 
Oversee the capital structure of the company, determining the best mix of debt, 
equity and internal financing; Oversee the finance function and act as the chief 
financial spokesperson for the organization; Oversee implementation of financing 
strategies and activities, as well as banking relationships; developed and utilized 
forward-looking, predictive models and activity-based financial analyses to provide 
insight into the organization's operations and business plans; Engage the finance 
meetings of the board to develop and/or adjust short-term, medium term, and 
long-term financial plans and projections; 
Percentage of time required: 30% 
3 
2. Oversee the financial statements; Present and report accurate and timely historical 
financial information of the company; Review financial statements to determine 
progress and status in attaining objectives; Formulate planning recommendations 
to the board; Review and approve preparation and finalization of monthly and 
annual financial reporting materials; Work with the CEO on the strategic vision 
including fostering and cultivating stakeholder relationships, as well as assisting in 
the development and negotiation of contracts; Assess the benefits of all perspective 
contracts and advise the COMP ANY on programmatic design and implementation 
matters; Oversee cash, investment, and asset management; 
Percentage of time required: 20% 
3. Evaluate potential investment projects and products; report and make financial 
recommendations to the board; Participate in developing new business and 
products, specifically: assist the Board in identifying new fonding or product or 
project opportunities, the drafting of prospective programmatic budgets, and 
determining cost effectiveness of perspective service delivery; Report to the board 
regarding financial, investment, budget issues; Report directly to the Board and 
directly on all strategic and tactical matters as they relate to budget management, 
cost benefit analysis, forecasting needs and the securing of new fonding; ensure 
adequate cash mode can meet the organizations need; Attend Board meetings, 
including being the lead staff on the audit/finance events; Monitor banking 
activities of the organization; 
Percentage of time required: 15% 
4. Develop, adjust and oversee implementing finance, accounting, billing, and 
auditing procedures; Oversee each department to ensure proper maintenance of all 
accounting systems and functions; Ensure maintenance of appropriate internal 
controls and financial procedures; Oversee the management and coordination of all 
fiscal recording activities for the organization including, such as organizational 
revenue/expense and balance sheet reports; Oversee all purchasing and payroll 
activity for staff and participants; Oversee the production of monthly reports 
including reconciliation with financial statements and cash flow projections; 
Oversee Accounts Payable and Accounts Receivable and ensure a disaster recovery 
plan is in place; 
Percentage of time required: 15% 
5. In charge of fond raising, revenue management, cost management, and profit 
management; Review and manage all costs and expenses; Analyze cash flow, cost 
controls, expenses, and investment proposals; implement internal audit; Oversee 
the implementation of financial plan; Coordinate audits and proper filing of tax 
returns; Provide the COMAPNY with an operating budget and work with the Board 
to ensure programmatic success through cost analysis support, and compliance with 
all contractual and programmatic requirements, such as interpreting legislative and 
programmatic rules and regulations to ensure compliance with all federal, state, 
4 
local and contractual guidelines, ensuring that all government regulations and 
requirements are disseminated to appropriate personnel, and monitoring 
compliance; Ensure adequate controls are installed and that substantiating 
documentation is approved and available such that all purchases may pass 
independent and governmental audits; 
Percentage of time required: 10% 
6. Oversee budgets and financial management of organization; Supervise investment 
and raising of fonds for business; Recommend yearly budget for board approval; 
Prepare financial analysis for contract negotiations and product investment 
decisions: Oversee budgeting, and the implementation of budget, so as to monitor 
progress and present operational metrics both internally and externally; Train the 
relevant staff on raising awareness and knowledge of financial management 
matters; Develop and maintain systems of internal controls to safeguard financial 
assets of the organization; Investigate cost effective benefit plans and other fringe 
benefits which the organization may offer employees and potential employees with 
the goal of attracting and retaining qualified individuals; assist in the design, 
implementation, and timely calculations of wage incentives, commissions, and 
salaries for the staff; overseas business insurance plans and health care coverage 
announced it; 
Percentage of time required: 10% 
While these detailed overviews of duties suggest that the Beneficiary holds a heightened degree of 
authority within the organization, the Petitioner did not explain how the stated duties fall within the 
definition of "executive capacity." 
The statutory definition of the term "executive capacity" focuses on a person's elevated position within 
a complex organizational hierarchy, including major components or functions of the organization, and 
that person's authority to direct the organization. Section 10l(a)(44)(B) of the Act. To show that a 
beneficiary will "direct the management" of an organization, a petitioner must show how the 
organization is managed and demonstrate that the beneficiary will primarily focus on the broad goals 
and policies of the organization rather than the day-to-day operations of the enterprise. An individual 
will not be deemed an executive under the statute simply because they have an executive title or 
because they "direct" the enterprise as the owner or sole managerial employee. 
Here, the Petitioner stated that the majority of the Beneficiary's time will be devoted to the "finance 
function," indicating that he will be responsible for developing, adjusting, and overseeing the 
organization's financial accounting and financial management systems. Specifically, the Petitioner 
claimed that the Beneficiary is responsible for overseeing the company's accounting, billing, and 
auditing procedures, analyzing cash flows, implementing internal audits, filing tax returns, and 
ensuring compliance with federal, state, local and contractual guidelines. While we observe that a 
company's CFO is generally tasked with the financial planning and forecasting functions of a 
company, the duties attributed to the Beneficiary appear to involve numerous non-qualifying, 
day-to-day duties that are not executive in nature. For example, the Petitioner claims that the 
5 
Beneficiary will file tax returns, monitor the organization's banking activities, oversee purchasing and 
payroll activity for staff and participants, reconcile financial statements and cash flow projection, and 
oversee accounts payable and accounts receivable. Based on these statements, it appears that the 
Beneficiary is directly involved in general accounting and bookkeeping duties, and will have 
substantial involvement in non-qualifying operational duties. 
Moreover, although the Petitioner maintains that the Beneficiary will oversee the organization's 
financial activities, it does not explain who, aside from the Beneficiary, will carry out these activities. 
While we acknowledge the Petitioner's claim that the Beneficiary will "train the relevant staff on 
raising awareness and knowledge of financial management matters," there is no indication that such 
personnel had been newly hired at the time of filing. As noted above, the Petitioner had only three 
departments at the time of filing: sales, marketing, and purchasing. Although the Petitioner claims 
that the Beneficiary "will direct the management of each department through department managers," 
there is no evidence demonstrating the existence of a finance or accounting department, nor is there 
any claim or indication that the Petitioner employs a subordinate staff tasked with accounting, 
bookkeeping, or other related financial tasks. Although the Petitioner vaguely stated that it relies on 
outside contractors for many operational functions, it has provided no evidence that an external ( or 
internal) financial or accounting department was accessible to relieve the Beneficiary from performing 
non-qualifying financial activities at the time of filing. An employee who primarily performs the tasks 
necessary to produce a product or to provide services, such as financial and accounting functions 
described herein, is not considered to be "primarily" employed in a managerial or executive capacity. 
Matter of Church Scientology Int'!, 19 I&N Dec. 593, 604 (Comm'r 1988). Based on these 
observations, it is unclear how the Beneficiary would be able to "direct the management" of the 
organization as claimed by the Petitioner. 
A beneficiary must also exercise "wide latitude in discretionary decision making" and receive only 
"general supervision or direction from higher level executives, the board of directors, or stockholders 
of the organization." Section 10l(a)(44)(B) of the Act. In response to the RFE, the Petitioner stated 
that the Beneficiary "will establish and adjust company's management policies, objectives, and 
strategies, esp. on finance, [and] formulate the company's financial strategic planning to achieve the 
objectives of the business plan with the aim of maximizing return and minimizing risk for the 
company." It also stated that as one of the company's two top executives, the Beneficiary "will only 
determine the important issues." However, these vague phrases do not explain the actual underlying 
tasks that the Beneficiary would carry out on a daily basis. Aside from establishing that the 
Beneficiary has discretion over operational and policy matters, it is unclear precisely what the 
Beneficiary would actually be doing. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director's decision did not contain a foll analysis of the 
evidence presented, and maintains that its description of duties was sufficient to establish that the 
Beneficiary will be employed in a primarily executive capacity. We acknowledge that the Director 
provided an alternative analysis on several elements of managerial capacity when evaluating the 
evidence, despite the Petitioner's specific contention that the proffered position is primarily executive 
in nature. Nevertheless, we conduct review on a de novo basis, and have thoroughly reviewed the 
submitted evidence and the Petitioner's claims with regard to the Beneficiary's executive capacity. 
For the reasons discussed above, however, we are not persuaded that the Beneficiary will be employed 
in a capacity that is primarily executive in nature. 
6 
Although the Beneficiary holds a senior position within the organization, the fact that he will manage 
or direct a business does not necessarily establish eligibility for classification as an intracompany 
transferee in an executive capacity within the meaning of section 101 (a)( 44 )(B) of the Act. By statute, 
eligibility for this classification requires that the duties of a position be "primarily" executive in nature. 
Id. The Beneficiary may exercise discretion over the Petitioner's day-to-day operations and possess 
the requisite level of authority with respect to discretionary decision-making; however, the position 
descriptions alone are insufficient to establish that his actual duties would be primarily executive in 
nature. 
B. Staffing and Organizational Structure 
As noted, the Petitioner indicates that it operates an international trading company specializing in 
health products, and claims that it had 10 employees when it filed the petition in September 2019. The 
Petitioner submitted an organizational chart, indicating that the beneficiary reports directly to the CEO, 
and identifying the Beneficiary's direct subordinates as a sales manager, a marketing manager, and a 
purchasing manager. The chart farther depicted a total of six sales representatives reporting to the 
sales manager; an assistant, a software engineer, and a designer reporting to the marketing manager; 
and four purchasing agents reporting to the purchasing manager. According to the chart, half of the 
sales representatives, the designer, and all of the purchasing agents are based abroad. In response to 
the RFE, the Petitioner submitted an updated organizational chart showing some turnover among its 
lower-level staff and indicating that the initial sales manager had been replaced. 
The Petitioner also submitted evidence of wages paid to staff in the second half of 2018, January to 
August 2019, and the first four months of 2020, along with copies ofW-2 forms for its employees for 
2019. However, the record contains no evidence, such as quarterly tax returns or pay stubs, for the 
period from September to December 2019. Although the Petitioner claimed to employ 10 individuals 
at the time of filing, the lack of payroll documentation for September 2019 raises questions regarding 
the actual staffing of the organization at the time of filing. At best, we can determine from the 
documentation submitted that, as of August 31, 2019, the Petitioner employed eight of the ten 
U.S.-based individuals listed on the organizational chart (excluding the sales manager and the software 
engineer). 
Upon review, the record does not clearly establish the management structure in place at the Petitioner's 
organization. The Petitioner has stated that the Beneficiary "directs the management of the whole 
U.S. entity through department managers." However, there is no evidence that a sales manager was 
actually employed by the Petitioner at the time the petition was filed, raising questions regarding the 
nature of the oversight and supervision of the Petitioner's sales representatives and the sales 
department in general. 2 For example, the overview of the sales manager's position provided by the 
Petitioner states that he will establish sales strategies to meet objectives, direct department staff to 
complete daily tasks, determine and manage the department budget and develop pricing strategy, 
evaluate customer and market research reports and competitor data and implement a sales plan, 
2 The record contains a W-2 form fotj l the claimed sales manager at the time of filing, indicating that he earned 
$2,540.08 in 2019. However, the record contains no information regarding his date of hire, and he is not on any quarterly 
tax returns or pay stubs prior to August 31, 2019. While it appears he was hired in the latter months of 2019, the evidence 
in insufficient to establish that he was employed by the Petitioner on the date the petition was filed. 
7 
oversee employee performance, liaise with media and advertising, and be responsible for managing 
the company's full range of products. The lack of evidence demonstrating the employment of a sales 
manager at the time of filing raises significant questions regarding whether the Beneficiary's 
employment is primarily executive in nature, as it appears that the Beneficiary would be responsible 
for assuming the duties of the sales manager in his absence. 
Further, as discussed above, the record contains no evidence that the organization has a finance or 
accounting department, or subordinate staff on the payroll, to relieve the Beneficiary from performing 
non-qualifying accounting and financial tasks. Although the Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary 
will direct the management of the entire organization through subordinate department managers, the 
obvious lack of a finance or accounting manager and lower-level personnel who would absolve the 
Beneficiary from the responsibility of performing day-to-day, non-qualifying financial activities 
undermines the Petitioner's claim that the Beneficiary's employment is in a primarily executive 
capacity. 
In addition, we note the Petitioner's submission of a list of accomplishments of the Beneficiary during 
his first year of employment with the company, which included his approval of budgets for the 
administrative and human resources departments that were proposed by the department managers. 
Again, referring back to the organizational chart, there is neither an administrative department nor a 
human resources department within the Petitioner's organization, and there is no indication that any 
of the department managers or lower-level staff are tasked with these basic administrative and 
operational functions. Based on this additional deficiency, we cannot determine who performs the 
essential administrative and operational tasks of the company, or the extent to which the Beneficiary 
is relieved from engaging in such non-executive duties. 
Overall, the evidence does not adequately document the Petitioner's employment of critical staff who 
would relieve the Beneficiary from involvement in the day-to-day financial management, supervision 
and other operational and administrative aspects of the organization. Again, while the Petitioner 
vaguely indicates that it has relied on independent contractors for assistance with various operational 
matters, it has not documented its use of such services. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director did not consider the reasonable needs of the 
organization. Pursuant to section 10l(a)(44)(C) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 110l(a)(44)(C), if staffing 
levels are used as a factor in determining whether an individual is acting in a managerial or executive 
capacity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) must take into account the reasonable 
needs of the organization, in light of the overall purpose and stage of development of the organization. 
In the present matter, however, the regulations provide strict evidentiary requirements for the 
extension of a "new office" petition and require USCIS to examine the organizational structure and 
staffing levels of the Petitioner. See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(14)(ii)(D). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(1)(3)(v)(C) allows the "new office" operation one year within the date of approval of the 
petition to support an executive or managerial position. There is no provision in USCIS regulations 
that allows for an extension of this one-year period. If the business does not have sufficient staffing 
after one year to relieve the Beneficiary from primarily performing operational and administrative 
tasks, the Petitioner is ineligible by regulation for an extension. In the instant matter, the Petitioner 
has not reached the point that it can employ the Beneficiary in a predominantly executive position. 
8 
The statutory definition of the term "executive capacity" focuses on a person's elevated position. 
Under the statute, a beneficiary must have the ability to "direct the management" and "establish the 
goals and policies" of an organization or major component or function thereof Section 10l(a)(44)(B) 
of the Act. To show that a beneficiary will "direct the management" of an organization or a major 
component or function of that organization, a petitioner must show how the organization, major 
component, or function is managed and demonstrate that the beneficiary primarily focuses on its broad 
goals and policies, rather than the day-to-day operations of such. An individual will not be deemed 
an executive under the statute simply because they have an executive title or because they "direct" the 
organization, major component, or function as an owner or sole managerial employee. 
Here, the Petitioner has not sufficiently documented its claimed employment of the sales manager 
who is claimed to support the Beneficiary's executive position. Nor has it demonstrated that it 
employs a subordinate staff of individuals tasked to perform financial, accounting, human resources, 
or general administrative tasks, such that the Beneficiary would be relieved from performing such 
non-qualifying tasks. Accordingly, the Petitioner has not established how the organization is 
managed, nor has it supported its claim that the Beneficiary is primarily focused on its broad goals 
and policies or that he is relieved from involvement in non-executive tasks necessary for its day-to-day 
operations. 
Based on the evidence submitted with the instant petition, the Petitioner has not met its burden to 
establish that it would employ the Beneficiary in an executive capacity under the extended petition. 
Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
9