sustained L-1A Case: Wireless Communications

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF A-T- INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrativ~ Appeals Office 
DATE: JAN. 30, 2019 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
\ 
The Petitioner, a distributor of wireless communication products and provider of related pre- and 
after-sales services, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as "CEO" of its new office1 under 
the L-1 A nonimmigrant classification for intracompany transferees. See Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(l5)(L), 8 U.S.C. § l l0l(a)(15)(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 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 
within one year of approval of the instant petition. The Director found that· the Petitioner's 
submission of two separate job descriptions resulted in confusion as to the percentage of time the 
Beneficiary would allocate to the described duties and expressed concern about the likelihood that 
the Beneficiary's subordinate managers "will be primarily managing or supervising and controlling 
other.supervisory, professional[,] or managerial employees." 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Beneficiary's proposed position fits the definitions of 
managerial and executive capacity. It points out that it has already hired two employees - one prior 
and one shortly after this petition was filed - and also provides a service contract to show that it 
already acquired a client and is currently doing business. The Petitioner also stresses that it is a 
"new office," indicating that the Director was not mindful of this fact in her assessment of the 
evidence. The Petitioner goes on to-discuss the motivating factors that contribute~ to its decision to 
open a U.S. subsidiary and points to the size of the foreign entity's investment, the size of the 
overseas company itself, and the proposed staffing hierarchy it seeks to attain within its first year of 
operation, claiming that it will have the infrastructure to relieve the Beneficiary from having to 
primarily perform non-qualifying tasks after its first year as a start-up company. 
1 The tenn "riew office" refers to an organization which has been doing business in. the United States for less than one 
year. 8 C.F.R. § 2_14.2(1)(1)(ii)(F). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 2l4.2(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 A-T- Inc. 
Upon de novo review, we find that the Director incorrectly applied the statutory definition of 
managerial capacity to the prospective management posjtions that would be subordinate to the 
Beneficiary. Further, although the Petitioner provided two job descriptions for the Beneficiary, as 
the Director indicated, each job description was labeled, thereby adequately establishing that one 
pertained to the Beneficiary's employment abroad, while the other pertained to his proposed position 
with the U.S entity. In sum, we find that the Petitioner has provided sufficient evidence to establish 
that it will more likely than not have the ability to employ the Beneficiary in a managerial or 
executive position within one year of this petition's approval. As the Petitioner has overcome the 
Director's decision, we will sustain the appeal. 
ORDER: The appeal i_s sustained. 
Cite as Matter of A-T- Inc., ID# 1957246 (AAO Jan. 30, 2019) 
2