L-1A Extension for Architectural Hardware Director

L-1A Extension for Architectural Hardware Director

  • Client: Ms. Ki
  • Applying for: 3 year L-1A Extension, L-1A status since 2000
  • Business: Architectural Hardware Importing and Exporting
  • Country/Region: Taiwan, China
  • Position: Director of Operations
  • Year Incorporated: 1999
  • Revenue: $285,000
  • Number of Employees: 2
  • Challenges:
    • Supervised employees were not managerial
    • Lacked organizational structure


Ms. Ki* came to Immigration Express seeking help in applying for an L-1A extension as a nonimmigrant transferee in order to continue her executive position in the United States. She had been granted L-1A status in the previous year to assist in the startup of the company in the United States and now wished to continue functioning in a similar capacity in furthering its growth even more. Otherwise, the company may simply not experience as much growth as it potentially could. As such, Ms. Ki came to us asking for assistance. We helped her file the petition on October 24, 2001 and received approval on November 13, 2001.



How we proved the control relationship between U.S. Company and Taiwan Company

We first had to prove that according to USCIS requirements, that the U.S. Company “is the same employer or a subsidiary or affiliate of the firm or corporation or other legal entity by which the alien was employed overseas.” We demonstrated that the company opened in the United States continued to maintain common ownership with its Chinese affiliate in Taiwan. We showed through the stock certificate and stock ledger entry for the company that all shares of common stock for the company have been transferred to the Taiwan company. We emphasized that there had been no business changes since the original L-1A approval the previous year. We were able to further prove the subsidiary nature of the company by demonstrating that the Taiwan company had offices in Hong Kong, Australia, Singapore, and Manila, doing business in all offices, as evidenced by recent invoices of business and the most recent accounting report. In order to further the U.S. company’s first year of operations and their viability for the future, we included documents such as its bank statements from the previous year, its tax returns for the most recent years, its trade show information, along with a sample of its catalog and advertising mediums.

How we proved that Mr. Pang’s proposed duties in U.S. Company were managerial or executive

As defined by USCIS, managerial capacity consists of tasks including “managing the organization, or a department, subdivision, function or component of the organization” and primarily “supervising and controlling the work of other supervisory, professional, or managerial employees, or managing an essential function within the organization, or a department or subdivision of the organization.” Executive capacity is defined as “directs management of the organization or a major component of function of the organization”, “establishes the goals and policies of the organization, component or function”, “exercises wide latitude in discretionary decision-making”, and “receives supervision or direction from higher level executives, the board of directors, or stockholders of the organization”. In proving this capacity, we first qualified Ms. Ki by highlighting her credentials in her education as well as her extensive experience in product development, trade regulations, export procedure, promotional strategies, and customer relations. Through a breakdown of her duties in the U.S. Company, we showed that she supervised the Financial Department, Research and Development Department, and the Business Department. We showed that in her extended time, she would be focused on developing domestic and international business connections, promoting the company via different outlets, identifying potential market openings, and developing various strategies for continued success. We emphasized Ms. Ki’s success over the past year in establishing and developing the company in the United States, and we thus proved that she would be functioning in a similar capacity and even more in a managerial and executive capacity in the upcoming years.



We filed the petition on October 24, 2001 and received approval in less than 3 weeks on November 13, 2001.

*Name has been changed to protect client identity.