All Cases

The AAO remanded the case because the Director disregarded the Petitioner's descriptions of job duties, misinterpreted evidence regarding the Beneficiary's U.S. start date (September 2023 vs. 2019), and incorrectly concluded the Beneficiary was employed as CFO in the U.S. based on a legal formality. The AAO also noted the Director should have focused on staffing at the time of filing and reconsidered the executive nature of the Beneficiary's work, asking for more information on non-supervised employees.