dismissed L-1A Case: Painting Equipment

PUBLIC COpy
Ldentit)tingdata deleted to
prevent clearly unwarr~nted
invasionof personalprivacy
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. A3000
Washington, DC 20529
u.S. Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
File: SRC 04 106 50400 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: JUl 0 62007
IN RE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
Petition: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(l5)(L) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(l5)(L)
IN BEHALF OF PETITIONER:
SELF-REPRESENTED
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~~,Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
SRC 04 10650400
Page 2
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas 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 summarily dismissed.
The petitioner filed this nonimmigrant visa petition seeking to employ the beneficiary as its general
operations manager as an L-IA nonimmigrant intracompany transferee pursuant to section 101(a)(l5)(L) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(L). The petitioner is a corporation
formed under the laws of the State of Florida and is allegedly engaged in the painting equipment business.'
The director denied the petition concluding that the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary will be • ~ "
employed in the United States in a primarily managerial or executive capacity. 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. The petitioner failed to state its reasons for the appeal in the Form I-290B. The petitioner also failed
to submit a brief or additional evidence to the AAO.
To establish eligibility under section 101(a)(l5)(L) of the Act, the petitioner must meet certain criteria.
Specifically, within three years preceding the beneficiary's application for admission into the United States, a
firm, corporation, or other legal entity, or an affiliate or subsidiary thereof, must have employed the
beneficiary for one continuous year. Furthermore, 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, executive, or specialized knowledge capacity.
Upon review, the AAO concurs with the director's decision and affirms the denial of the petition.
Regulations at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v) state, in pertinent part:
An officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily dismiss any appeal when the party
concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of
fact for the appeal.
Inasmuch as the petitioner has failed to identify specifically an erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of
fact in this proceeding, the appeal must be summarily dismissed. In visa petition proceedings, the burden of
proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C.
§ 1361. The petitioner has not met this burden.
ORDER: The appeal is summarily dismissed.
'According to Florida state corporate records, the petitioner's corporate status in Florida was "administratively
dissolved" on September 15, 2006. Therefore, since the corporation may not carry on any business except
that necessary to wind up and liquidate its affairs, and the petitioner has not taken steps under Florida law to
seek reinstatement, the company can no longer be considered a legal entity in the United States. See Fla. Stat.
607.1421 (2006). This would call into question the petitioner's continued eligibility for the benefit sought if
the appeal were not being summarily dismissed.