remanded L-1A Case: Manufacturing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 9710273 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for L-lA Manager or Executive 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG . 31, 2020 
The Petitioner, a manufacturer of liner materials for disposable hygiene products, seeks to temporarily 
employ the Beneficiary as its chief operations officer (COO) under the L-lA nonimmigrant 
classification for intracompany transferees. Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 
101(a)(15)(L), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(L). The L-lA classification allows a corporation or other legal 
entity (including its affiliate or subsidiary) to transfer a qualifying foreign employee to the United 
States to work temporarily in a managerial or executive capacity. 
The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish, as required, that the Petitioner will employ the Beneficiary in the United States in a 
managerial or executive capacity. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that Director erroneously denied 
the petition and submits additional evidence in support of its claim that it will employ the Beneficiary in 
an executive capacity. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. See 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will remand the matter to the 
Director for further consideration and entry of a new decision. 
At this time, we are unable to address the merits of this case because the record is incomplete. The 
record reflects that the Director issued a request for evidence (RFE) on August 15, 2019. While the 
Director acknowledged that the Petitioner submitted a timely response to the RFE on November 7, 
2019, most of that response is not incorporated into the record of proceeding.1 We cannot determine 
whether the Director considered the full RFE response, nor can we base our own decision in this case 
on an incomplete record. 
The Director bears the responsibility of ensuring that the record is complete and contains all evidence 
that has been submitted by a petitioner or considered by USCIS in reaching its decision. See 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.2(b)(l); cf. Matter of Gibson, 16 l&N Dec. 58, 59 (BIA 1976). Accordingly, we will withdraw 
1 The record includes the Petitioner's cover letter in response to the RFE and an index listing the attached exhibits, which 
are referred to as Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and numbered Exhibits 1-27. Of the exhibits listed in the index, only Exhibit A is 
in the record before us. 
the Director's decision and remand this matter for the inclusion of the missing record materials and 
further consideration. 
Upon remand, the Petitioner should have the opportunity to supplement the record. In addition, we 
note that the Petitioner has submitted new evidence on appeal which is relevant to the Beneficiary's 
eligibility as of the date of filing. Specifically, the new evidence supports the Petitioner's claim that 
it employed over 100 workers when it filed the petition and corroborates a previously submitted 
organizational chart reflecting the subordinate staff who wi 11 report to the Beneficiary's senior position 
in the company hierarchy. The Director is the more appropriate party to consider the impact of the 
new evidence on the Petitioner's eligibility, as we cannot adjudicate the appeal based on the 
incomplete record. 
The Director should issue a new decision based on a review of the complete record, including the 
evidence submitted on appeal. In doing so, the Director should ensure that the Petitioner's complete 
RFE response is in the record. Further, the Director should consider whether the Petitioner has 
established eligibility at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(1). 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for the entry of a 
new decision consistent with the foregoing analysis, which, if adverse, shall be certified 
to us for review. 
2