sustained L-1A Case: Software Solutions

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF S-, INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: APR,. 13,2018 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, an invoice management sotiware solutions provider, seeks to continue the Beneficiary's 
temporary employment as its chief executive officer under theL-IA nonimmigrant classification for 
intracompany transferees. 1 See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section IOI(a)(IS)(L), 
8 U .S.C. § 1 I 0 I (a)( I 5)(L). The L- I A 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 Petitioner did not 
establish, as required, that. it would employ the Beneficiary in a managerial or executive capacity under 
the extended petition. The Director also found that the Petitioner did not establish it has been doing 
business because one of its ollices "is located in a residential area where commercial activities are not 
authorized." 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director's decision was "based on a partial and selective 
review of the evidence," and failed to take into account the depth and complexity of the petitioning 
organization and its need for an executive to direct its management. The Petitioner also maintains 
that it provided sufficient evidence of its ongoing business activities and growth at two separate 
business locations. 
Upon de novo review of the record, we will sustain the appeal. The Petitioner has established by a 
preponderance of' the evidence that the Beneficiary will be employed in an executive capacity. It 
provided a detailed and credible description of the Beneficiary's job duties, as well as extensive 
supporting evidence showing that he has many resources available to remove him from involvement 
in the day-to-day operational duties of the business. These resources include managers and 
professionals employed by the Petitioner and its parent company, who in turn oversee subordinate 
employees, contractors, and other service providers responsible for product development, marketing, 
1 
The Petitioner previously filed a "new office" petition on the Beneficiary's behalf which was approved for the period 
August 15,2016, until August 14,2017. The Petitioner's initial request for an extension of its new office petition was 
filed on June 21. 2017, and denied on July 26, 2017. 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(\)(l)(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 managerial position. 
Mauer ofS-. Inc. 
sales, and customer support duties, as well as ancillary human resources, administrative, and finance 
functions. The evidence is sufficient to establish that the Beneficiary will primarily perform 
executive duties as defined at section IOI(a)(44)(B) of the Act, will mainly focus on the company's 
policies and goals for development, and will be able to delegate management of most company 
functions to his subordinates. 
Moreover, we find no reason to doubt the credibility of the evidence the Petitioner submitted to 
corroborate its business activities during the previous year 2 The Petitioner established that it is 
doing business as defined by the regulations. See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(l)(ii)(H). 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as MatterS-. Inc .. JD# I 095834 (AAO Apr. 13, 2018) 
' - The Director raised a concern that one of the two offices leased by the Petitioner is located in a residential area. The 
regulations do not specify the type of physical premises that an L-1 petitioner must secure. See 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(1)(3)(v)(A). Here, the Petitioner provided evidence that the landlord has authorized the use of residential space 
for commercial purposes. as well as photographs and business documents showing that the office in question 
accommodates the Petitioner's employees and business operations. 
2