dismissed L-1A Case: Medical Supplies

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8418927 
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: AUG. 10, 2020 
The Petitioner, an importer and distributor of medical supplies, seeks to seeks to continue the 
Beneficiary's temporary employment in the United States as its general manager under the L-lA 
nonimmigrant classification for intracompany transferees. Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) 
section 101(a)(15)(L), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(l5)(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 record did not 
establish, as required, that the Petitioner will employ the Beneficiary in the United States in a 
managerial or executive capacity. 
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, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for the L-lA nonirnmigrant visa classification, a qualifying organization must 
have employed the beneficiary "in a capacity that is managerial, executive, or involves specialized 
knowledge," for one continuous year within three years preceding the beneficiary's application for 
admission into the United States. Section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Act. 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. 
II. EMPLOYMENT IN A MANAGERIAL OR EXECUTIVE CAPACITY 
The Director denied the petition based on a finding that the Petitioner did not establish that it will 
employ the Beneficiary in a managerial capacity. (The Petitioner does not claim that it seeks to employ 
the Beneficiary in an executive capacity.) 
"Managerial capacity" means an assignment within an organization in which the employee primarily 
manages the organization, or a department, subdivision, function, or component of the organization; 
supervises and controls the work of other supervisory, professional, or managerial employees, or 
manages an essential function within the organization, or a department or subdivision of the 
organization; has authority over personnel actions or functions at a senior level within the 
organizational hierarchy or with respect to the function managed; and exercises discretion over the 
day-to-day operations of the activity or function for which the employee has authority. Section 
10l(a)(44)(A) of the Act. 
To be eligible for L-lA nonimmigrant visa classification as a manager, a petitioner must show that the 
beneficiary will perform the high-level responsibilities set forth in the statutory definition at section 
10l(a)(44)(A)(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 managerial position. 
If a petitioner establishes that the offered position meets all four elements set forth in the statutory 
definition, the petitioner must then prove that the beneficiary will be primarily engaged in managerial 
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 the beneficiary's 
duties will be primarily managerial, we consider the description of the job duties, the company's 
organizational structure, the duties of the beneficiary's subordinate employees, the presence of other 
employees to relieve the beneficiary from performing operational duties, the nature of the business, 
and any other factors that will contribute to understanding the beneficiary's actual duties and role in 
the business. 
If staffing levels are used as a factor in determining whether an individual is acting in a managerial 
capacity, we must take into account the reasonable needs of the organization, in light of the overall 
purpose and stage of development of the organization. See section 101 (a)( 44 )( C) of the Act. 
This decision centers on the requirement that a manager supervises and controls the work of other 
supervisory, professional, or managerial employees, or manages an essential function within the 
organization, or a department or subdivision of the organization. See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(1)(ii)(B)(2). 
The Petitioner asserts that the Beneficiary meets this requirement because he supervises and controls 
the work of professional employees. 
The Petitioner's organizational chart shows the following structure, with monthly salary amounts 
taken from 2018 pay receipts in the record: 
President/Chief Executive Officer 
1-------- Accountant (contractor) 
General Manager, $3750/month 
I 
Technical Advisor/Sales Coordinator, $1400/month 
Sales Representative 1 
$1320/month 
Sales Representative/ 
Surgical Technician, $1320/month 
Sales Representative 2 
$2000/month 
The Petitioner initially stated: "The 3 Sales Representatives/Surgical Technician report to the 
Technical Advisor/Sales Coordinator ... and in tum, they indirectly report to" the Beneficiary. The 
2 
Director concluded that the Petitioner had not shown that the "company requires three levels of 
management to oversee three Sale[ s] Representatives," or that the technical advisor/sales coordinator 
is actually employed in a managerial or supervisory position." The Director noted "numerous 
references to the beneficiary himself directly controlling the Sales Representatives," such as assigning 
tasks and reviewing reports. On appeal, the Petitioner does not contend that the technical advisor/sales 
coordinator is a supervisory employee. Therefore, we need not address that issue. Instead, the 
Petitioner's appeal is focused on the assertion that the Beneficiary's subordinates are professionals. 
To determine whether the Beneficiary manages professional employees, we must evaluate whether the 
subordinate positions require a baccalaureate degree as a minimum for entry into the field of endeavor. 
Cf 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) (defining "profession" to mean "any occupation for which a United States 
baccalaureate degree or its foreign equivalent is the minimum requirement for entry into the 
occupation"). Section 101(a)(32) of the Act states that "[t]he term profession shall include but not be 
limited to architects, engineers, lawyers, physicians, surgeons, and teachers in elementary or secondary 
schools, colleges, academies, or seminaries." 
The Petitioner has not shown that the subordinate positions are professional. They key issue is whether 
the positions require at least a bachelor's degree. If they do not require one, then it is irrelevant 
whether or not the employees hold bachelor's degrees. 
The technical advisor/sales coordinator's duties include evaluating sales and logistics processes and 
sales representatives' performance, along with significant non-supervisory duties including 
maintaining inventory, storage, and sales and shipping documents. She has a bachelor's degree in 
Nursing. The sales representatives "are responsible for the day-to-day logistics and sales activities of 
the company," including visiting conventions, collecting payments, and "dispatching ... products." 
The Petitioner's office includes a warehouse, but the company's organizational chart does not identify 
any dedicated warehouse workers to handle storage and shipment of inventory. It appears, therefore, 
that these non-professional tasks are among the "day-to-day logistics ... activities" delegated to the 
sales representatives. The duties described do not appear to be professional in nature. 
The Petitioner initially stated that two sales representatives hold bachelor's degrees in nursing, while 
the third has a master's degree in Business Administration. One of these sales representatives holds 
occupational certifications not shown to be equivalent to a bachelor's degree; another lists college 
attendance on her resume, but the record does not show that she graduated with a bachelor's degree. 
Following a request for evidence, the Petitioner indicated that it had replaced one of the sales 
representatives. The Petitioner stated: "we prefer our personnel to hold at least a bachelor's degree," 
because sales associates should be able to discuss medical equipment with customers, and that "most 
of our salespersons hold at least a bachelor's degree." A preference is not a requirement; the Petitioner 
acknowledges hiring sales associates who do not hold baccalaureate degrees. 1 The record must 
establish that the employer requires, rather than prefers, a bachelor's degree. 
1 Acknowledging that one sales associate has no bachelor's degree, the Petitioner states that she accumulated the necessary 
expeitise through years of prior experience in medical equipment sales. This same earlier experience, however, 
demonstrates that the individual was able to obtain that prior experience with no bachelor's degree. Another sales associate 
holds degrees in business administration, with no demonstrated background in medical equipment either academically or 
through past experience. 
3 
For this reason, we agree with the Director's finding that the Petitioner has not shown the subordinate 
positions to be professional. 
The Director also determined that the Beneficiary's subordinates do not appear to be paid at a rate 
commensurate with foll-time, year-round employment in a professional occupation. Tax and payroll 
record show that the Petitioner paid the Beneficiary $14,300 in 2017, and $3 7 50 per month in 2018, 
significantly below the stated salary of $60,000 per year ($5000 per month). 2 
The monthly wages of the Beneficiary's subordinates appear to be inconsistent with professional-level 
salaries; three of the Petitioner's four subordinates earned less than minimum wage for foll-time 
employment. 3 The Petitioner states that its sales staff work on commission, but no commission 
payments are evident on the submitted payroll records or IRS Forms W-2. 
The Petitioner's explanation for the low salaries is vague and insufficiently corroborated. The 
Petitioner has not persuasively established that the Beneficiary's subordinates are foll-time employees, 
with duties and remuneration consistent with professional positions. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
2 The Petitioner only paid $25,304 in salaries in 2017, divided between the Beneficiary, two officers of the company, and 
one sales representative. There is no direct evidence that the Petitioner paid any salaries between January and September 
2017. 
3 In 2018, Florida's minimum wage was $8.25 per hour, equivalent to $1430 per month. See https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ 
whd/state/minimum-wage/history (last visited Jun. 25, 2020). 
4