dismissed L-1A Case: Software Consulting

ident&ing data deleted to 
vt !ea-;i-:; !-warranted 
invasm of pcmd privacy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave.. N.W., Rrn. 3000 
Washington. DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: EAC 00 259 5 1200 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: MAY 1 5 2007 
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. fj 1 10 1 (a)( 15)(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. 
3 
L' . 7 
./jLL4 ++A h~~. 
Rkert P. demann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
EAC 00 259 5 1200 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The nonimmigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Vermont Service Center. The 
petitioner subsequently filed an appeal with the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO), which the AAO 
dismissed. The matter is again before the AAO on a motion to reopen or reconsider. The motion will be 
dismissed. 
The petitioner is described as software consulting company. It seeks to employ the beneficiary temporarily in 
the United States as its systems analyst. The director determined that the petitioner had not established that 
the beneficiary had been or would be employed in a primarily managerial or executive capacity. On appeal, 
the AAO affirmed the director's decision and dismissed the appeal. 
On motion, counsel for the petitioner contends that the beneficiary is eligible for the requested nonimmigrant 
petition, as the beneficiary qualifies as a manager under the definition contained in 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(1). 
A review of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) records indicates that this 
beneficiary is also the beneficiary of an approved immigrant petition, filed by the same employer, and has 
adjusted status to that of a permanent resident status as of December 1, 2004. While the petitioner has not 
withdrawn the motion in this proceeding, it would appear that the beneficiary is presently a permanent 
resident and the issues in this proceeding are moot. Therefore, this motion is dismissed. 
ORDER: The motion is dismissed as moot.