remanded L-1A Case: Investment Research
Decision Summary
The Director's decision was withdrawn and the matter was remanded. The AAO found that the Director improperly based the revocation on a site visit to the Beneficiary's home office rather than the Petitioner's actual place of business. Because the site visit was at the wrong location and the officer did not make contact with the Beneficiary, it could not serve as a valid basis for concluding the Petitioner was not doing business or that the Beneficiary's role was not managerial.
Criteria Discussed
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services In Re: 7407905 Appeal of California Service Center Decision Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office Date : FEB. 6, 2020 PETITION: Form I-129, Petition for L-lA Manager or Executive The Petitioner claims to be a provider of investment research and marketing services and data analytics solutions. It seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as its "Country Manager" under the L-lA nonimmigrant classification for intracompany transferees who are coming to be employed in the United States in a managerial or executive capacity. Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(L) , 8 U.S.C. ยง 1101(a)(15)(L). The Director of the California Service Center revoked the approval of the petition after conducting a site visit, which led the Director to conclude that the Petitioner is not conducting business at the address of the site visit and that the Beneficiary's U.S. employment is in a managerial capacity. The matter is now before us on appeal. The Petitioner argues that the Director overlooked the fact that the Beneficiary's work location is in California, which is separate from the Petitioner's headquarters and place of business iq !Illinois. The Petitioner points out that this infonnation was disclosed at the time of filing the petition. Upon review, we find that the Director incorrectly relied on a site visit to the Beneficiary's home office, rather than the Petitioner's place of business, to conclude that the Petitioner was not doing business. Further, because the USCIS officer who conducted that visit was unable to make contact with the Beneficiary, the site visit also cannot serve as a basis for finding that the Beneficiary's employment in the United States is not in a managerial capacity. Therefore, we will withdraw the Director's decision and remand the matter for further consideration. ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the foregoing opinion and for the entry of a new decision.
Draft your L-1A petition with AAO precedents
MeritDraft uses real AAO decisions to generate compliant petition arguments tailored to your evidence.
Sign Up Free →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.