dismissed L-1A Case: Textiles

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rrn. A3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
laenrifYiog baa; UGA~W tt~ 
U.S. Citizenship 
preven( ~kady unwamntec: and Immigration 
iDIv&on of oersonal priwct 
POSLIC COPY 
FILE: EAC 05 104 53569 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: sEp 0 $ ~@~ 
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 10 1 (a)(15)(L) 
ON BEHALF OF BENEFICIARY: 
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. 
M 
Jobert P. Wiemann, Chief 
\Administrative Appeals Office 
EAC 05 104 53569 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The director, Vermont Service Center, denied the petition for a nonimrnigrant visa. The 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be rejected. 
The petitioner claims that it is operating as a manufacturer and distributor of textiles. 
 It filed this 
nonimmigrant new office petition seelung authorization to employ the beneficiary temporarily in the United 
States as its president, pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 
U.S.C. 9 1101(a)(15)(L). The director denied the petition based on the following independent conclusions: 
(1) the petitioner had not established that the beneficiary was employed abroad in a primarily managerial or 
executive capacity; and (2) the petitioner failed to establish that it would be able to support a primarily 
managerial or executive position within one year of the approval of the petition. 
The claimed counsel for the petitioner, 
 filed the I-290B in this matter. Although it was 
timely filed and accompanied by the required fee, the Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative 
(Form G-28) that was submitted for the record does not provide a basis for counsel to enter his appearance as 
an authorized representative of the petitioner.' Specifically, while counsel claims on the Form G-28 that he is 
a member of the New York State Bar Association, the New York State Office of Court Administration, 
Attorney Registration Unit has no record of counsel's admission. In addition, the American Bar Association 
(ABA) indicates that counsel's membership is not that of a lawyer but is that of an associate. According to the 
ABA, while lawyer membership is limited to attorneys licensed to practice in the United States, associate 
membership is available to any individual with an interest in the law. Based on the foregoing, counsel has 
failed to demonstrate that he is authorized under 8 C.F.R. 5 292.1 to enter his appearance on behalf of the 
petitioner and file the present appeal.2 
Citizenship and Immigration Services regulations specifically prohibit the filing of an appeal by a person or 
entity not entitled to file it. 8 C.F.R. 9 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(I). As counsel is not an authorized representative, 
counsel is not authorized to file an appeal, and it must therefore be rejected as improperly filed. 8 C.F.R. 9 
103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(l); 8 C.F.R. 9 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(2)(i). 
As the appeal was not properly filed, it will be rejected. 8 C.F.R. 8 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(l). 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected. 
It is noted for the record that the AAO considers the appeal timely filed due to the several day delay by the 
service center in mailing the initial rejection notice to the petitioner. But for this delay, it appears that counsel 
would have returned the signed appeal to the service center before the director's stated deadline of June 7, 
2005. 
2 
 Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 8 292.4(a), the AAO sent a fax to counsel on August 24, 2006, requesting that he 
submit evidence of his admission to practice law within five business days. As of the date of this decision, no 
response has been received from counsel.