sustained L-1A Case: Fitness

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF N-S-G-, LLC 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: FEB. 2. 2018 
PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a sports gym and fitness center, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as chief 
executive officer of its new oftice 1 under the L-1 A nonimmigrant classification for intracompany 
transferees. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section IOI(a)(I5)(L), 8U.S.C. 
§ IIOI(a)(IS)(L). The L-IA 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 Vermont Service Center denied the petition. concluding that the Petitioner did 
not establish, as required, that it would employ the Beneficiary in a managerial or executive capacity 
within one year of the approval of the petition. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and contends that the Director did not consider 
the totality of the evidence and erred by basing the decision, in part. on the Petitioner's current 
staffing levels. The Petitioner maintains that it submitted sufticient evidence to establish that the 
new office would support a managerial or executive position within one year. 
Upon de novo review, we will sustain the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
To establish eligibility for the L-lA nonimmigrant visa classification for a new office, 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. Section I 0 I ( a)(IS)(L) of the 
Act. The petitioner must also establish that the beneficiary's prior education. training. and 
1 
The term "new office" refers to an organization which has been doing business in the United States for less than one 
year. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(l)(l)(ii)(F). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(3)(v)(C) allows a "new office" operation no 
more than one year within the date of approval of the petition to support an executive or managerial position. 
Matter of N-S-G-. LLC 
employment qualifies him or her to perform the intended services in the United States. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(1)(3). 
The petitioner must submit evidence to demonstrate that the new office will be able to suppot1 a 
managerial or executive position within one year. This evidence must establish that the petitioner 
secured sufficient physical premises to house its operation and disclose the proposed nature and 
scope of the entity, its organizational structure, its financial goals, and the size of the U.S. 
investment. See generally, 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(3)(v). 
II. DISCUSSION 
The Director found that the evidence did not establish that the Beneficiary would be employed in a 
managerial or executive capacity as defined at section I 01 (a)( 44) of the Act. 
In the denial decision, the Director determined that the Petitioner provided only a general description 
of the Beneficiary's proposed duties and those of his proposed subordinates and determined that the 
intended duties would be inconsistent with the "reasonable operational needs of l the Petitioner's] 
fitness facility.'' The Director acknowledged that the Petitioner ''may entertain possibilities for 
expansion,'' but found that the record did not show a realistic possibility that the Petitioner would 
expand beyond a single location during the lirst year. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence, including an updated business plan and a 
detailed, multi-page description of the Beneficiary's proposed duties. The Petitioner also submits an 
expert opinion letter in support of its claim that it will employ the Beneliciary in a qualifying 
capacity. In addition, the Petitioner provides a copy of a Buyer Broker Agreement as evidence that, 
prior to the denial of the petition, it had already retained the services of a real estate broker to locate 
a second commercial property for a possible second location. 
Upon de novo review of the record, including the additional evidence submitted in suppm1 of the 
appeal and in response to a request for evidence issued by our office, we find that the Petitioner has 
sufticiently addressed the specific deficiencies discussed in the Director's decision. Further, we find 
that the Petitioner has established that the company would more likely than not grow sufliciently 
during its initial year of operations to support the Beneficiary in a managerial capacity. 
At the time of filing, the Petitioner had purchased an existing fitness business and was already 
operating a 20,000 square foot bodybuilding gym and fitness facility with at a growing staff of 
employees and contracted personal trainers in place. The Petitioner has submitted a detailed and 
credible description of the Beneficiary's proposed duties and the record now establishes that within 
one year, he would primarily manage the organization, oversee a subordinate staff of managerial or 
supervisory employees with authority to make personnel decisions, and exercise discretion over the 
day-to-day operations of the business. See section I 01 (a)( 44)(A) of the Act (defining "managerial 
capacity''). 
2 
Maller of N-S-G-, LLC 
While the Director expressed concerns regarding the Petitioner's intended business plans, the 
Petitioner's intent to expand to a second facility is now documented in the record. Further, given the 
size of the first facility and the number and types of staff projected, it appears that the Petitioner 
could support a managerial position even if it does not open a second facility within its initial year. 
Whether the Beneficiary is a managerial employee turns on whether the Petitioner has sustained its 
burden of proving that their duties would be "primarily" managerial. See sections 10l(a)(44)(A) of 
the Act. Here. the Petitioner has met that burden. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has established that it would employ the Beneficiary in a managerial capacity within 
one year of the approval of the petition. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as Matter ofN-S-G-. LLC, ID# 622865 (AAO Feb. 2, 20 I 8)