EB-1C covers multinational managers and executives transferring to a U.S. office. AAO decisions focus on qualifying managerial capacity, organizational structure, and one-year abroad requirement.
SCOPS denied this EB-1C petition for a general manager at an online computer electronics retailer on the ground that the company had not shown it was doing business for at least one year. The AAO reversed that finding, noting that purchase invoices, sales invoices, and shipping documents in the record clearly showed regular, systematic, and continuous business activity. However, the AAO remanded rather than approved the petition because of four separate deficiencies: foreign-language documents lacked the required translator certification; the stock certificate purporting to show a parent-subsidiary relationship was incomplete and unsigned; the job description was too vague to establish that the beneficiary's duties are primarily executive in nature; and payroll records contradicted the petitioner's claimed staffing level. On remand, SCOPS must issue a new decision addressing these issues and may issue a Request for Evidence to give the petitioner an opportunity to cure the deficiencies.
A commercial and trading company filed an I-140 to permanently employ the Beneficiary as its president under the EB-1C multinational executive classification. SCOPS denied the petition and dismissed the subsequent motion to reopen, concluding that the Beneficiary's proposed duties were not qualifying and that he had not worked abroad for the required one year. The AAO found two fundamental legal errors: SCOPS failed to adequately analyze the detailed job duty evidence and wrongly implied current employment was required, and SCOPS applied an incorrect timeframe by ignoring the Beneficiary's documented foreign employment between December 2013 and December 2016. The AAO withdrew the denial and remanded for a new decision with proper analysis.
A company selling cellphones and accessories filed an I-140 petition to employ a foreign national as its president under the EB-1C multinational executive classification. SCOPS denied the petition on three grounds, including that the beneficiary's duties were too vague to establish a qualifying executive or managerial role. After the petitioner's motion to reopen was dismissed as untimely, the petitioner appealed but did not address either the untimeliness ruling or the core denial ground regarding executive/managerial capacity. The AAO dismissed the appeal because failure to address dispositive issues on appeal constitutes a waiver of those issues. The remaining denial grounds regarding qualifying corporate relationship and bona fide job offer were not reached.
A U.S. golf, real estate, and import company petitioned to permanently employ a foreign national as its general manager under the EB-1C multinational executive/manager classification. SCOPS denied the petition and the AAO dismissed the appeal, finding that the Petitioner failed to establish the Beneficiary met the foreign employment requirement. The record contained pervasive inconsistencies: the original support letter claimed full-time employment since 2009, but a later response stated employment was part-time until 2012; the Beneficiary omitted the parent company from three nonimmigrant visa applications; the organizational chart listed only 22 employees while the petition claimed over 5,000; and key corporate documents contained anomalies including conflicting dates, inconsistent company names, and contradictory references to a board of directors. The Petitioner's attempt to blame an unlicensed representative for these discrepancies under an ineffective assistance of counsel theory was rejected because that doctrine applies only to licensed attorneys or accredited representatives.
A U.S. lifestyle products distributor sought to permanently employ a beneficiary as its executive director under the EB-1C multinational executive classification. SCOPS denied the petition in a decision the AAO found to be largely conclusory, containing only a few sentences of actual analysis and improperly conflating the definitions of managerial and executive capacity. The AAO found that SCOPS over-relied on staffing levels, failed to assess the nature of the petitioner's business, and never addressed whether the foreign affiliate in South Korea continues to operate. Additionally, the AAO flagged unresolved inconsistencies between the company's claimed distribution activities and its small office lease describing only a fabric sales use. Because SCOPS did not adequately explain its reasoning or give the petitioner fair notice, the AAO remanded for a new, comprehensive decision.
A commercial airline filed an EB-1C petition to permanently employ a senior manager in its aircraft maintenance department. USCIS denied the petition after the Petitioner failed to respond to a Request for Evidence (RFE). The AAO previously dismissed the appeal and denied a first motion, finding the RFE was properly mailed. On a second combined motion, the Petitioner submitted a declaration from counsel claiming the RFE was never received, but the AAO found that attorney declarations do not constitute independent evidence. The AAO also rejected the Petitioner's argument that USCIS must prove the RFE was actually delivered, noting no regulation, statute, or precedent supports that standard. Both the motion to reopen and motion to reconsider were dismissed.
A non-profit religious organization filed an I-140 petition to permanently employ its Swami In-Charge in the U.S. under the EB-1C multinational manager/executive classification. SCOPS denied the petition on the ground that the beneficiary's proposed position did not meet the statutory definition of managerial capacity because his subordinate assistant ministers lacked U.S. bachelor's degrees or foreign equivalents necessary to qualify as professionals. On appeal, the petitioner argued that expert testimony showed work experience as a senior monk was equivalent to a theology degree, and that not every subordinate needs to hold a degree. The AAO rejected these arguments, affirming that work experience cannot substitute for a formal degree under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) and that the petitioner had itself asserted the beneficiary would supervise professionals, making professional subordinates a required element. The AAO also flagged deficiencies in the ability-to-pay documentation as an issue for future filings, though it was not a basis for this dismissal.
A company seeking to permanently employ a Beneficiary as its Executive Director in the wholesale and retail of customized industrial pneumatic equipment had its EB-1C petition denied by SCOPS and then dismissed on appeal by the AAO. The AAO found that the job description was overly vague and lacked the specific daily tasks and time-allocation percentages requested in the RFE. The organizational chart submitted in response to the RFE reflected post-filing personnel restructuring that could not be used to establish eligibility as of the petition's filing date. Additionally, inconsistencies between W-2 records, email signatures, and organizational charts further undermined the Petitioner's credibility. As a result, the AAO could not determine that the Beneficiary would primarily perform executive duties rather than operational tasks.
A library services company filed an I-140 to permanently employ its Latin America Portfolio manager under the EB-1C multinational manager/executive classification. SCOPS denied the petition based on two errors: incorrectly requiring a separate foreign legal entity (when the beneficiary worked for the U.S. company's foreign branch) and inadequately reviewing the detailed job duty evidence supporting managerial capacity. The AAO reversed both adverse findings but identified a new unresolved issue: the company's evidence that it qualifies as a multinational entity through an affiliate relationship with a Russian company was insufficient due to an incomplete and improperly certified translation, missing document pages, and an apparently revocable proxy agreement that contradicted the owner's claim of controlling the Russian entity. The case was remanded for SCOPS to reconsider the multinational entity question and potentially request additional evidence.
A restaurant management company petitioned for permanent residence for a beneficiary to serve as general manager at its wholly owned subsidiary. SCOPS denied the petition, finding no valid job offer and insufficient evidence of qualifying managerial capacity abroad. The AAO reversed the job-offer finding, noting that employment at a wholly owned subsidiary satisfies the employer requirement. The AAO also found that SCOPS misread the personnel manager definition by requiring supervision of professionals only, and failed to analyze all four foreign managerial positions during the qualifying three-year window in the aggregate. The matter was remanded for a new decision addressing all positions and the correct legal standard.
A carpentry business sought to permanently employ its general manager under the EB-1C multinational manager or executive classification. SCOPS denied the petition on grounds that no qualifying relationship with the foreign employer was established and the proposed U.S. employment was not managerial or executive. The AAO found SCOPS' decision procedurally deficient because it failed to discuss the probative value of submitted evidence or provide specific reasons for denial. The AAO also found substantive errors, including SCOPS improperly relying solely on headcount to deny managerial capacity and raising the managerial capacity issue in the denial without giving the Petitioner an RFE opportunity to respond. The matter was remanded for a new decision addressing qualifying relationship, managerial/executive capacity, multinational status, and the Beneficiary's prior qualifying employment abroad.
A cell phone retailer petitioned to permanently employ a beneficiary as COO under the EB-1C multinational executive/manager classification. After USCIS revoked the petition's approval, the AAO upheld the revocation, and the Petitioner filed multiple subsequent motions. The current motion to reconsider argued that a prior motion was filed late due to counsel's withdrawal and a mailing error. The AAO found that prior decisions had clearly stated correct filing instructions, and the Petitioner's explanation did not meet the legal standard of delay 'reasonable and beyond its control.' Because the motion also attempted to re-litigate issues from earlier stages of the proceeding — which is outside the scope of a motion limited to the latest decision — the AAO dismissed the motion and the revocation of the petition's approval stands.
See all 938 EB-1C cases →