dismissed L-1A Case: Relocation Services

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Ofice ofAdministrative Appeals, MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U. S. Citizenship 
identifyins cata deleted to 
 and Immigration 
prevent -fear' anranted 
invmbn of p- : , .dl privaq 
File: WAC 09 034 51266 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: 
 NOV 2 5 2009 
IN RE: 
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: 
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. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to have 
considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5 for 
the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided your case by 
filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. 
 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
Peny Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 09 034 51266 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California Service Center, denied the petition for a nonimmigrant visa. The 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will dismiss the appeal. 
The petitioner filed this nonimmigrant visa petition seeking to employ the beneficiary as an L-1A 
nonimmigrant intracompany transferee pursuant to section 10 1 (a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1101(a)(15)(L). The petitioner, a global relocation services provider, has employed 
the beneficiary in the position of relocation services manager in L-1A status since 2005, and now seeks to 
extend his status for two additional years. 
The director denied the petition on December 22, 2008, concluding that the petitioner failed to establish that 
the beneficiary would be employed in a primarily managerial or executive capacity under the extended 
petition. 
A review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) records indicates that this beneficiary is also the 
beneficiary of an approved employment-based immigrant visa petition filed by the petitioner. The beneficiary 
adjusted status to that of a U.S. permanent resident as of July 30, 2009. While the petitioner has not 
withdrawn the appeal in this proceeding, it would appear that the beneficiary is presently a lawful permanent 
resident and the issues in this proceeding are moot. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is dismissed as moot.