remanded L-1A Case: Textiles

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 6690173 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form I-129, Petition for L-lA Manager or Executive 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : MAR. 5, 2020 
The Petitioner, a textile import and distribution company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary 
as its "Executive Vice President" under the L-1 A 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. § 1101(a)(15)(L). 
The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition concluding that the Petitioner did not 
establish, as required, that the Beneficiary would be employed in the United States in a managerial or 
executive capacity. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Beneficiary would be employed in a managerial capacity and 
contends that the Director did not consider the weight of the evidence, including the Beneficiary's job 
duty breakdown and the volume of business it does in the United States. It further contends that the 
Director did not properly apply the law to the facts presented. 
Upon de nova review, we find that the Director offered an incomplete analysis of the submitted 
evidence; therefore, we will remand the matter for further proceedings consistent with our discussion 
below. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
To establish eligibility for the L-lA nonimmigrant visa classification , a qualifying organization must 
have employed the beneficiary in a managerial or executive capacity for one continuous year within 
three years preceding the beneficiary's application for admission into the United States. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(1)(3)(v)(B). In addition, 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 or executive capacity. Id. 
A petitioner seeking to extend an L-lA petition that involved a new office must submit a statement of 
the beneficiary's duties during the previous year and under the extended petition; a statement 
describing the staffing of the new operation and evidence of the numbers and types of positions held; 
evidence of its financial status; evidence that it has been doing business for the previous year; and 
evidence that it maintains a qualifying relationship with the beneficiary's foreign employer. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(1)(14)(ii). 
II. BASIS FOR REMAND 
As noted earlier, we find that the Director's decision did not adequately explain the deficiencies in the 
evidence. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(i); see also Matter of M-P-, 20 I&N Dec. 786 (BIA 1994) 
(finding that a decision must folly explain the reasons for denying a motion to allow the respondent a 
meaningful opportunity to challenge the determination on appeal). Although the Director concluded 
that "[f]or the foregoing reasons" the Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary would be 
employed in a managerial or executive capacity, he did not state what those "foregoing reasons" were 
or offer an analysis of the evidence to support this conclusion. 
Notwithstanding the Director's lack of a complete analysis, the record is currently insufficient to 
establish that the Beneficiary would be employed in a managerial capacity, as claimed. Namely, the 
record includes a broad job description that lacks sufficient detail about the specific tasks the 
Beneficiary would perform within the context of the Petitioner's home textile operation. The actual 
duties themselves reveal the true nature of the employment. Fedin Bros. Co., Ltd. v. Sava, 724 F. 
Supp. 1103, 1108 (E.D.N.Y. 1989), aff'd, 905 F.2d 41 (2d. Cir. 1990). Although the Petitioner 
indicates that the Beneficiary oversees two subordinate managers, it is unclear whether the company 
was adequately staffed at the time of filing to relieve the Beneficiary from having to allocate her time 
primarily to non-managerial job duties. 
The definition of managerial capacity has two parts. First, the Petitioner must show that the 
Beneficiary will perform the high-level responsibilities set forth in the statutory definition at section 
101(a)(44)(A)(i)-(iv) of the Act. Second, the Petitioner must prove that the Beneficiary will be 
primarily engaged in managerial duties, as opposed to ordinary operational activities alongside the 
Petitioner's other employees. See, e.g., Family Inc. v. USCIS, 469 F.3d 1313, 1316 (9th Cir. 2006). 
The record as presently constituted does not meet these criteria. 
III. CONCLUSION 
Although the Petitioner did not submit sufficient evidence to meet its burden of establishing that the 
Beneficiary will be employed in a managerial capacity, the Director's decision did not adequately 
analyze the facts of the matter and apply the law. As the Director did not satisfy this condition, we 
will remand the matter for entry of a new decision. The Director should request any additional 
evidence deemed warranted and allow the Petitioner to submit such evidence within a reasonable 
period of time. 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for farther 
proceedings consistent with the foregoing opinion and for the entry of a new decision. 
2