dismissed L-1A Case: Rugs And Kilims Retail

U.S.Department of Homeland Security
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000
Washington, DC 20529
PUBLIC COpy
identifyingdata deleted to
prevent clearly unwarranted
invasionof personalprivacy
U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
':1-.....~.
r:
Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
File: WAC 0218250402 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: SEP 0 62001
INRE:
Petition: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(l5)(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.
~~
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
WAC 02 182 50402
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 appeal will be dismissed.
The petitioner filed this nonimmigrant petition seeking to employ the beneficiary as an L-lA nonimmigrant
intracompany transferee pursuant to section 101(a)(l5)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8
U.S.C. § 1101(a)(l5)(L). The petitioner, a California corporation, is described as a producer, importer and
retailer of Persian rugs and kilims. The petitioner states that it is a subsidiary of the beneficiary's foreign
employer, which is located in Iran. The petitioner seeks to open a new office in the United States and has
requested that the beneficiary be granted a one-year period in L-IA classification to serve as its managing
director and chief financial officer.
The director concluded that the beneficiary is a native of Iran who would be coming to the United States to
work as an employee of an Iranian business entity. Therefore, in accordance with the Executive Orders and
regulations relating to Iranian economic sanctions, the director concluded that the beneficiary is not
authorized to carry out activities in the United States as an intra-company transferee.
On appeal, counsel for the petitioner asserts that the beneficiary is coming to the United States to work for a
U.S.-based entity organized under the laws of California, and as such, he will not be an agent, employee or
contractor of the Government of Iran or a business entity or other organization in Iran. Counsel emphasizes
that the services to be offered by the beneficiary are not addressed specifically and are not prohibited pursuant
to the regulation at 31 C.F.R. § 560.306(d)(3). Finally, counsel notes that the goods to be imported by the
U.S. petitioner, Iranian carpets, are among the imported goods authorized by the Department of Treasury
regulations.
A review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) records indicates that the beneficiary in this
matter is also the beneficiary of an approved family-based immigrant petition. The beneficiary has adjusted
status to that of a U.S. permanent resident as of December 23,2003. 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, the appeal is dismissed.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed as moot.