dismissed L-1A Case: Medical Equipment

PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Massachusetts Ave. N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
File: LIN 03 179 5 1843 Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: ET 0 4 2006 
Petition: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 
 1 101(a)(15)(L) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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. 
jtobert P. Wiemann, cdef 
.~~drninistrative Appeals Office 
li, 
LIN 03 179 51843 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the petition for a nonirnrnigrant visa. The 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will dismiss the appeal. 
The petitioner filed this nonimrnigrant petition seelung to employ the beneficiary as an L-1A intracompany 
transferee pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 9 
1101(a)(15)(L). The petitioner is a Washington corporation that states that it exports advanced medical 
equipment and related software and technology. The petitioner claims that it is a subsidiary of a Chinese 
company The petitioner seeks to employ the beneficiary as its president for a two- 
year period. 
The director denied the petition concluding that the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary will be 
employed in a primarily managerial or executive capacity in the United States. 
The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal. The director declined to treat the appeal as a motion and 
forwarded the appeal to the AAO for review. On appeal, counsel for the petitioner asserts that the director 
erred in determining that the beneficiary would not supervise subordinate managerial personnel. Counsel 
submits a brief and an expert opinion letter in support of the appeal. 
A review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) records indicates that the instant 
beneficiary's spouse was the beneficiary of an approved employment-based immigrant petition, and that the 
beneficiary in this case has adjusted status to that of a legal U.S. permanent resident as of April 7, 2005. 
While the petitioner has not withdrawn the appeal in this proceeding, it would appear that the beneficiary is 
presently a permanent resident and the issues in this proceeding are moot. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed as moot.