sustained L-1A Case: Kitchen Equipment

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 15276937 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for L-lA Manager or Executive 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : JAN. 7, 2021 
The Petitioner, an importer and distributor of commercial stainless steel kitchen equipment, seeks to 
continue the Beneficiary's temporary employment as its president 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. 1 Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(l5)(L), 
8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(l5)(L) . 
Following a post adjudicative site visit and further review of the record, which included evidence 
provided in response to a notice of intent to revoke, the Director of the Texas Service Center 
determined that the record lacked evidence showing that the Beneficiary has a sufficient support staff, 
thereby leading to the conclusion that the Beneficiary would perform "many" of the Petitioner's 
operational tasks . The Director also determined that the Beneficiary's job description was vague and 
did not substantiate her claimed leadership role in setting the organization 's policies, sales targets, and 
financial objectives. In light of these findings, the Director revoked approval of the petition. 
On appeal, the Petitioner disputes the revocation, arguing that the Director placed undue emphasis on 
the number of employees listed on the company's payroll summary and did not properly consider other 
evidence in the record, which indicates that the Petitioner has consistently used an outsourced 
accounting firm as well as an outside sales and marketing company to carry out operational tasks that 
are critical to its operation. The Petitioner notes that its parent entity, which is a manufacturer and 
supplier of stainless-steel kitchen equipment, has invested over $8 million to purchase a warehouse 
and inventory for the Petitioner's U.S. operation. The Petitioner also highlights the volume of business 
the foreign entity currently conducts, stating that the Petitioner's U.S. presence would further the 
foreign entity's goal of expanding throughout North America, beyond the midwestem portions of the 
United States, where its U.S . clients are currently based . 
1 The Petitioner previously filed a "new office" petition on the Beneficiaiy 's behalf which was approved for the period 
October 1, 2017, until September 30, 2018. A "new office" is an organization that has been doing business in the United 
States through a parent , branch , affiliate , or subsidiary for less than one year. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(1 )(ii)(F) . The regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(3)(v)(C) allows a "new office" operation one year within the date of approval of the petition to 
support an executive or manageri al position . 
Upon de nova review, the record shows that the Petitioner provided sufficient evidence to support its 
claims. Although the Director considered the Beneficiary's job description, it does not appear that he 
properly considered other relevant evidence, such as the detailed communications between the 
Beneficiary and her support staff as well as the Petitioner's use of contracted service providers beyond 
the in-house employees named in its payroll summary. Such evidence indicates that the Beneficiary 
has and continues to assume a senior leadership role within the organization. It also indicates that the 
Petitioner more likely than not had sufficient support from a combination of in-house employees and 
contracted service providers to relieve the Beneficiary from having to primarily engage in daily 
operational tasks. Furthermore, adequate consideration of the foll scope of the operation indicates that 
the Petitioner is part of a broader international organization that includes an established foreign parent 
entity, which operates in the same industry as the Petitioner and is able to manufacture and supply the 
Petitioner with the inventory it requires to meet the needs of its existing and prospective clients in the 
United States. 
In light of the above, we find that the Petitioner has satisfied the preponderance of the evidence 
standard of proof Therefore, we will sustain the appeal. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
2