dismissed L-1A Case: Services

u.s.Departmentof Homeland Security
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Rm. A3000
Washington, DC 20529
u.s.Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
PUBLIC COpy
File: SRC 06 119 50925 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: SEP 0 6 2001
IN RE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
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)(15)(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.
·····__ ·····-········A-·~
R~~rt ~ann, Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
SRC 06 119 50925
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 extend the employment of the beneficiary as its
general 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)(l5)(L). The petitioner is a corporation
organized under the laws of the State of Florida and describes its type of business as "services.?'
The director denied the petition concluding that the petitioner did not establish (1) that the beneficiary was
employed abroad primarily in an executive or managerial position; (2) that the beneficiary will be employed
in the United States primarily in an executive or managerial position; or (3) that the petitioner is a qualifying
organization because the petitioner failed to establish that it is currently doing business.
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, the petitioner submitted the Form 1-290B and a
statement. The petitioner asserts the following in the attached statement:
I am appealing the decision of [Citizenship and Immigration Services] dated 01/13/2007,
because I satisfied the law requirements for the granting of the extent [sic] of my L-l Visa.
Therefore, I ask respectfully the revocation of that decision and the granting of the extent of
my L-l Visa.
To establish eligibility under section 101(a)(15)(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)(l)(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.
'According to Florida state corporate records, the petitioner's corporate status in Florida was "administratively
dissolved" on September 15, 2006. 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). If the petition were not being summarily dismissed, the dissolution of the petitioner would
call into question its continued eligibility for the benefit sought.
SRC 06 119 50925
Page 3
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.