On certification from the California Service Center (CSC), the Administrative Appeals Office approved a new office L-1A extension for a function manager, finding that the CSC erroneously focused almost entirely on the size of the U.S. company without considering the reasonable needs of the organization as a whole. The term “function manager” applies generally when a beneficiary does not supervise or control the work of a subordinate staff but instead is primarily responsible for managing an “essential function” within he organization. See section IOI(a)(44)(A)(ii) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § IIOI(a)(44)(A)(ii).
Administrative Appeals Office approved a new office L-1A extension for a function manager.
The petitioner established that the beneficiary devoted more than half of his time to managerial duties.
The petitioner is a Taiwan based company that provides direct technical and engineering support to its foreign U.S. based customers. The Director of USCIS denied Petitioner’s L-1B petition on behalf of the beneficiary and concluded that the evidence was insufficient to prove that the Beneficiary possesses “specialized knowledge” as required under 8 C.F.R.§214.2(l)(1)(ii)(D).
The ultimate question is whether the Petitioner has met its burden of demonstrating by a preponderance of the evidence that the beneficiary’s knowledge or expertise is “advanced or special” and that the beneficiary’s position requires such knowledge.
The Director of USCIS denied Petitioner’s L-1B petition and concluded that the evidence was insufficient to prove that the Beneficiary possesses “specialized knowledge”.
The Administrative Appeals Office sustained Petitioner’s appeal, finding that the beneficiary has advanced knowledge of the foreign employer’s processes and procedures.