Critical Requirements for New Office L-1 Managerial or Executive Petition

Jun 8, 2023 | Immigration Updates

This blog focuses on outlining the USCIS regulations regarding L-1A managerial or executive qualifications for new office applications and provides tips on how applicants can strengthen their applications.

To qualify for L-1A classification, the applicant must demonstrate the following general requirement:

  • Has at least one continuous year of full-time employment abroad with a qualifying relationship:
    • Within the 3 years before application for admission to the U.S.
    • In a position that is managerial or executive
  • Will be employed in a managerial or executive position in the U.S.
  • Has prior education, training, or employment that qualifies applicant to perform the intended services in the U.S.

1-in-3 Requirements:  Whether the applicant is an executive or manager of the foreign company, they must have worked full-time for at least one year with the qualifying foreign company within the three years preceding the L-1A visa application. This requirement is often referred to as the “one in three years” rule.

To demonstrate the applicant’s 1 year employment, the USCIS officers look for documentation such as payroll stubs, employment verification, resume, and other relevant documents.

[TIPS]: It is crucial to ensure that the information listed on all the documents is consistent and precise. A well-organized and well-prepared petition undergoes meticulous scrutiny to verify the precision and uniformity of all the documents submitted to the USCIS.

Employment Abroad: The next significant challenge is providing a substantial amount of documentation and job descriptions to prove that the applicant is indeed an executive or manager.

To prove an executive position, the applicant must show:

  1. How the applicant will direct the management of the organization, or a major component or function of the organization
  2. How the applicant will establish the goals and policies of the organization, component, or function
  3. How the applicant will exercise wide latitude in discretionary decision-making; and
  4. Whether the applicant will receive only general supervision or direction from higher level executives, the board of directors, or stockholders

All 4 aspects can be illustrated by a detailed job description outlining the applicant’s daily executive duties, supported by documents such as drafted policies, agendas, annual goals, presentations, reports, strategy meetings, and internal documents directing the subordinate departmental managers.

[TIPS]: A well-drafted support letter that methodically illustrates applicant’s executive duties will be crucial in addressing questions about the nature of the executive duties, how they are carried out, and why executive role is important to the company. Addressing the “what, how, and why” aspects will tell a compelling story about the applicant’s employment and satisfy USCIS requirements.

To demonstrate the position is managerial, we must show:

  1. How the applicant managed the organization, department, subdivision, function, or component of the organization he or she oversaw
  2. How the applicant supervised and controlled the work of other supervisory, professional, or managerial employees, or managed an essential function, department, or subdivision of the organization
  3. Whether the applicant had the authority to hire and fire or recommend similar personnel actions (such as promotion and leave authorization) if other employees were directly supervised (or if no other employee was directly supervised, how the beneficiary functioned at a senior level within the organizational hierarchy or with respect to the managed function)
  4. How the applicant made decisions on daily operations of the activity or function under his or her authority. If the applicant was a first-line supervisor, submit evidence showing the supervised employees were professionals

In this scenario, the managerial capacity is further divided into personnel managerial capacity and functional managerial capacity. The distinction between these two subcategories is determined by whether the applicant manages a function or other professionals.

[TIPS]: If the applicant manages other professionals, it is crucial t to provide sufficient supporting documentation that addresses the following three “Ws”:

  1. Who are the subordinate employees?
  2. What authorities does the applicant have over those employees such as control the work of subordinate employees’ daily tasks
  3. Whether the beneficiary has the authority to hire and fire, or recommend similar personnel actions (such as promotions and leave authorizations)

[TIPS]: If the applicant manages a function of the company, they should gather and prepare the following documents, which demonstrate another set of three “Ws”:

  1. Why is this function essential to the company
  2. What are the duties performed by the applicant to manage this essential function
  3. Whether the applicant acts at a senior level within the company’s hierarchy or with respect to the function managed

[TIPS]: A well-drafted petition will emphasize the managerial capacity by addressing these sets of three “Ws” and methodically selecting supporting documents that purposefully demonstrate the applicant’s managerial duties in terms of personnel management and/or functional management. Sometimes, these two sub-categories may overlap, so it is crucial to evaluate the applicant’s duties to determine which sub-category is best suited for their own qualifications.

Related Posts:

Immigration Update

In this edition, read about a second random selection of H-1B registrations, relief for certain OPT applicants, and the DHS’ announcement on the registration process for Haitian TPS. USCIS Conducts Second Random Selection from Previously Submitted FY 2022 H-1B Cap Registrations More H-1Bs!  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced on July 29, 2021, that it needed to select additional H-1B registrations to reach the fiscal year (FY) 2022 quota. On July 28, 2021, the agency selected additional previously submitted electronic registrations using a random selection process. The petition filing period based on registrations selected on July 28 will begin on August 2 and close on November 3, 2021. Individuals with selected registrations will have their myUSCIS accounts updated to include a selection notice, which includes details of when and where to file. Registration selection only indicates that petitioners are eligible to file H-1B cap-subject petitions; it does not indicate that the petition will be approved. USCIS conducted an initial random selection in March 2021 of electronic registrations submitted for the FY 2022 H-1B cap and of beneficiaries eligible for the advanced degree exemption. The initial filing period for those selected for FY 2022 was April 1, 2021, through June […]

Immigration Update

In this edition, find the latest news on the termination of the ‘Remain in Mexico’ Policy, expanded eligibility for Deferred Enforced Departure for Liberians, the CBP announcing the end of using expired passports for U.S. Citizens, and more. Supreme Court Allows Biden Administration to Terminate ‘Remain in Mexico’ Policy On June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court held that the Biden administration could end the so-called “Remain in Mexico” policy, which required asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their immigration hearings. The Court ruled that the Biden administration’s attempt to terminate it via a memorandum issued in October 2021 was a valid final agency action. The Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. On remand, “the District Court should consider in the first instance whether the October 29 Memoranda comply with section 706 of the [Administrative Procedure Act,” the Court said. Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Kavanaugh joined. Justice Kavanaugh filed a concurring opinion. Justices Alito, Barrett, Thomas, and Gorsuch dissented. Details:  Biden v. Texas, 597 U.S. (2002), https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-954_7l48.pdf  “The U.S. Supreme Court Rules Administration Can […]