sustained L-1B Case: Semiconductor Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF I-M-C-N-A-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: MAR. 6, 2018 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a supplier of semiconductor memory technology, seeks to continue the Beneficiary's 
employment as its "WLAN Product Architect" under the L-1 A nonimmigrant classification for 
intracompany transferees. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(L), 
8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(L). The L-IB classification allows a corporation or other legal entity 
(including its affiliate or subsidiary) to transfer a qualifying foreign employee with "specialized 
knowledge" to work temporarily in the United States. 
The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish, as required, that the Beneficiary: (1) possesses specialized knowledge; (2) has been 
employed abroad as a manager or executive, or in a specialized knowledge capacity; and (3) will be 
employed in the United States in a specialized knowledge capacity. 
On appeal, the Petitioner explained in greater detail how the Beneficiary gained his specialized 
knowledge. The Petitioner discussed his progressive experience with the foreign entity and 
explained how he built on that experience to acquire knowledge of his employer's products and their 
application within the IT industry worldwide. Further, the Beneficiary contributed to product 
invention and the development of new processes and solutions. Seven patent applications name the 
Beneficiary among the short list of inventors of items that were either granted a patent or were patent 
pending, and of those seven applications, four were granted at the time this appeal was filed. 
The Petitioner also confirms that in a group of 1400 product architects, the Beneficiary is one ofless 
than 30 technical leaders in his employer's wireless connectivity solutions group. In sum, we find 
that the record of proceeding, as supplemented by the Petitioner's submission on appeal, establishes 
that the Beneficiary possesses specialized knowledge. Upon de novo review, we will sustain the 
appeal. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as Matter ofl-M-C-N-A-, ID# 1068751 (AAO Mar. 6, 2018)