dismissed L-1A Case: Manufacturing

u.s. Department of Homeland Security
20 Massachusetts Ave. , N.W.,Rm. A3000
Washington , DC 20529
u.s.Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: DEC 0 62006
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(L)
Petitioner: .
Beneficiary:
INRE:
File: SRC 05 107 50951
Petition:
PUBLIC COpy
identifyingdatadeleted to
preveatelarly unw..ranted
invasion·of personalprivacy
IN 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.
~:::=~:;;;r~~/
RobertP.Wiemann;'Cnief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
SRC 05 107 50951
Page 2
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the petition for a nonimmigrant visa. The matter
is now before the Administrative Appeals Offiee (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected pursuant to 8
C.F.R. § l03.3(a)(2)(v)(A).
The petitioner seeks to extend the employment of the beneficiary as its vice president for international sales in
the United States as an L-1A nonimmigrant intracompany transferee pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(L) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(L). The U.S. petitioner, a corporation
organized in the State of Texas, is en a ed in the manufac'ture 0 . ..t" .,..fixturesand bathroom accessories
and claims to be the subsidiary 0 :: 'located in Sao
Paulo, Brazil. The director denied t e petition, cone u mg t at t e petrtioner a ai e to establish that the
beneficiary was or would be employed ina primarily managerial or executive capacity.
The appeal in this matter was filed on behalf of the beneficiary. It is further noted that the Form G-28, Entry
of Appearance as Attorney or Representative, dated March 2, 2005, was not signed by the petitioner or an
authorized representative thereof, but rather by the beneficiary, who noted on the Form G-28 that the form
was filed on his behalf. It is noted for the record that, while the beneficiary does appear to be an agent for the
petitioner, there is no evidence in the record that the beneficiary signed the Form G-28 as a representative on
behalf of the petitioner with regard to the appeal before the AAO. Specifically, the Form G-28 submitted by
counsel, as well as Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal, clearly limits his representation/appearance to the
beneficiary, and nowhere is it indicated that the beneficiary signed the form in his capacity as vice president
for 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. § 103.2(a)(3). As the beneficiary and his representative are
not recognized parties, counsel is not authorized to file an appeal, and it must therefore be rejected. 8 C.F.R.
§103.3(a)(1 )(iii)(B); 8 C.F.R. §103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(1).
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.