Matter of I- Corp.

April 12, 2017 PM-602-0143 Policy Memorandum SUBJECT: Matter of I- Corp., Adopted Decision 2017-02 (AAO Apr. 12, 2017) This policy memorandum (PM) designates the attached decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in Matter of I- Corp. as an Adopted Decision. Accordingly, this adopted decision establishes policy guidance that applies to and binds all U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) employees. USCIS personnel are directed to follow the reasoning in this decision in similar cases. Matter of I- Corp. clarifies that USCIS cannot approve a visa petition that is based on an illegal or otherwise invalid employment agreement. To prevent a potential conflict with the Fair Labor Standards Act, USCIS must ensure that a beneficiary will not be paid a wage that is less than the minimum required wage under state or Federal law, whichever is higher, before approving an employment-based visa petition. Use This PM is intended solely for the guidance of USCIS personnel in the performance of their official duties. It is not intended to, does not, and may not be relied upon to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or by any individual or other party in removal proceedings, in litigation with the United States, or in any other form or manner. Contact Information Questions or suggestions regarding this PM should be addressed through appropriate directorate channels to the AAO.

2017年4月12日 PM-602-0143 政策备忘录 主题：Matter of I- Corp.，已采纳决定 2017-02（AAO 2017年4月12日） 本政策备忘录（PM）将行政上诉办公室（AAO）在 Matter of I- Corp. 中附随的决定指定为已采纳决定。因此，该已采纳决定确立了适用于并约束所有美国公民及移民服务局（USCIS）雇员的政策指导。USCIS人员须遵循本决定中的推理处理类似案件。 Matter of I- Corp. 澄清，USCIS不能批准基于非法或其他无效雇佣协议的签证申请。为避免与《公平劳动标准法》产生潜在冲突，USCIS在批准基于就业的签证申请之前，必须确保受益人将获得的工资不低于州法或联邦法规定的最高最低必需工资。 使用 本PM仅供USCIS人员履行公务时参考。其不意图、也不得被依赖以创设任何权利或利益，无论实体性或程序性，可在法律上或由任何个人或其他当事方在驱逐程序中、在与美国的诉讼中、或以任何其他形式或方式强制执行。 联系信息 有关本PM的问题或建议应通过适当的局渠道向AAO提出。

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS OFFICE U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

行政上诉办公室 美国公民及移民服务局

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

国土安全部

April 12, 2017 [1]

2017年4月12日 [1]

(1) U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) cannot approve a visa petition that is based on an illegal or otherwise invalid employment agreement. (2) To prevent a potential conflict with the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), USCIS must ensure that a beneficiary will not be paid a wage that is less than the minimum required wage under state or Federal law, whichever is higher, before approving an employment-based visa petition. FOR THE PETITIONER: Juan C. Flamand, Esquire, Phoenix, Arizona The Petitioner, a semiconductor manufacturing company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a “Failure Analysis Engineer” in Oregon under the L-1B nonimmigrant classification for intracompany transferees. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(L), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(L). The L-1B classification allows a corporation or other legal entity (including its affiliate or subsidiary) to transfer a qualifying foreign employee with “specialized knowledge” to work temporarily in the United States. The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the evidence did not demonstrate that the Beneficiary possesses specialized knowledge or that he has been and will be employed in a capacity requiring specialized knowledge. The matter is now before us on appeal. The Petitioner asserts that it has established eligibility for the benefit sought.

(1) 美国公民及移民服务局（USCIS）不能批准基于非法或其他无效雇佣协议的签证申请。 (2) 为避免与《公平劳动标准法》（FLSA）产生潜在冲突，USCIS在批准基于就业的签证申请之前，必须确保受益人将获得的工资不低于州法或联邦法规定的最高最低必需工资。 申请人代表：Juan C. Flamand，Esquire，亚利桑那州凤凰城 申请人是一家半导体制造公司，寻求根据L-1B非移民公司内部调职人员分类，临时雇用受益人在俄勒冈州担任“失效分析工程师”。见《移民与国籍法》（该法）第101(a)(15)(L)条，8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(L)。L-1B分类允许公司或其他法律实体（包括其关联公司或子公司）调派具有“专业知识”的合格外国雇员临时在美国工作。 加州服务中心主任拒绝了该申请，认定证据未能证明受益人拥有专业知识，或他曾经并将以需要专业知识的身份受雇。此事现因上诉而由我们审理。申请人主张其已确立所寻求福利的资格。

Matter of I- Corp. Adopted Decision Upon de novo review, we have identified an antecedent issue that must be further developed and resolved before evaluating whether the position requires, and the Beneficiary possesses, specialized knowledge. On the Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, the Petitioner indicated that it would employ the Beneficiary for a 2-year period at a total wage of “43,445 MYR per year.” When converted from Malaysian ringgits (MYR) to U.S. dollars, this proffered salary is the equivalent of $13,467.95 per year or $6.47 per hour. 2 We are unable to approve an employment-based visa petition where the record indicates that a petitioner will not pay its beneficiary the minimum wage required by applicable labor law. We will remand this matter to the Director for further development of the record and entry of a new decision.

Matter of I- Corp. 已采纳决定 经重新审查，我们发现在评估该职位是否需要且受益人是否拥有专业知识之前，必须先进一步发展和解决一个前置问题。在I-129表《非移民工人申请表》上，申请人表示其将以每年“43,445 MYR”的总工资雇用受益人2年。从马来西亚林吉特（MYR）换算为美元后，该拟议薪资相当于每年$13,467.95或每小时$6.47。2 当记录表明申请人不会向受益人支付适用劳动法要求的最低工资时，我们无法批准基于就业的签证申请。我们将此事发回主任进一步补充记录并作出新决定。

I. DISCUSSION USCIS is primarily responsible for adjudicating immigration benefit requests available under applicable immigration law. To determine eligibility for many immigration benefits, USCIS officers must also take into account other, intersecting areas of law, such as criminal, family, and (as relevant here) labor. The central issue here is whether the Petitioner established that the Beneficiary will be paid a wage that meets or exceeds the required minimum wage as mandated by the FLSA of 1938, Pub. L. No. 75-718, 52 Stat. 1060 (codified as amended at 29 U.S.C. § 201-219). As explained below, we cannot approve an employment-based visa petition that is based on an illegal or otherwise invalid employment agreement. 3 The FLSA provides for Federal minimum wage requirements for employers. 29 U.S.C. § 206. When Federal and state minimum wage laws differ, an employer must pay a wage that meets or exceeds the minimum required wage of whichever requirement is higher. See 29 U.S.C. § 218(a). The expressed policy of the FLSA is to eliminate labor conditions “detrimental to the maintenance of the minimum standard of living necessary for health, efficiency, and general well-being of workers,” including that which “constitutes an unfair method of competition in commerce.” 29

I. 讨论 USCIS主要负责裁决适用移民法下可获得的移民福利请求。为确定许多移民福利的资格，USCIS官员还必须考虑其他交叉法律领域，例如刑法、家庭法以及（与此相关）劳动法。这里的核心问题是，申请人是否已证明受益人将获得达到或超过1938年《公平劳动标准法》所规定最低必需工资的工资，Pub. L. No. 75-718, 52 Stat. 1060（经修订编纂于29 U.S.C. § 201-219）。如下所述，我们无法批准基于非法或其他无效雇佣协议的基于就业的签证申请。3 FLSA规定了适用于雇主的联邦最低工资要求。29 U.S.C. § 206。当联邦和州最低工资法不同时，雇主必须支付达到或超过其中较高要求的最低必需工资的工资。见29 U.S.C. § 218(a)。FLSA明示的政策是消除“有害于维持工人健康、效率和一般福祉所需最低生活标准”的劳动条件，包括“在商业中构成不公平竞争方法”的条件。29

2

2

Matter of I- Corp. Adopted Decision U.S.C. § 202. Such detrimental working conditions include the payment of a wage below that set by the FLSA as the minimum wage. See 29 U.S.C. § 206. The right to a minimum wage under the FLSA cannot be waived by agreement between an employee and his or her employer. Brooklyn Sav. Bank v. O’Neil, 324 U.S. 697 (1945). Contractual understandings or agreements which effectively circumvent or evade the protections of the FLSA are invalid and unenforceable. 4 With that background in labor law, we note our authority and responsibility to consider these labor provisions in our administration of immigration law. While wage laws are not expressly restated in the Act, it is implied that authorized employment must comply with both the Act and the FLSA. 5 Only when it sought to exceed FLSA protections has Congress included specific wage-related provisions in the Act. 6 Longstanding case law requires “careful accommodation of one statutory scheme to another” to achieve congressional objectives. 7 In granting benefits under our Act, we must take into account the equally important congressional objectives of the FLSA, which in this case are expressed through its minimum wage provisions. See 29 U.S.C. §§ 202 and 206. In the instant matter, we take administrative notice that the Federal minimum wage applicable at the time this petition was filed was $7.25 per hour. 8 And, also as of the time of filing, the State of Oregon set a higher minimum wage, mandating $8.95 per hour. 9 Because Oregon’s minimum wage is higher than the Federal minimum, the higher Oregon standard applies. 10 If the Petitioner’s offer of employment is indeed $6.47 per hour, as represented on the Form I-129, the proposed salary would violate the Federal and state minimum wage protections, and thus the offer of employment would be invalid under the FLSA.

Matter of I- Corp. 已采纳决定 U.S.C. § 202。此类有害工作条件包括支付低于FLSA规定最低工资的工资。见29 U.S.C. § 206。 FLSA下的最低工资权利不能由雇员与其雇主之间的协议放弃。Brooklyn Sav. Bank v. O’Neil, 324 U.S. 697 (1945)。实质上规避或逃避FLSA保护的合同谅解或协议无效且不可执行。4 基于上述劳动法背景，我们注意到我们在执行移民法时有权也有责任考虑这些劳动条款。虽然该法未明确重述工资法，但隐含授权就业必须同时遵守该法和FLSA。5 国会仅在其试图超越FLSA保护时，才在该法中纳入具体的工资相关条款。6 长期判例法要求“仔细协调一种法定制度与另一种法定制度”以实现国会目标。7 在根据我们的法授予福利时，我们必须考虑FLSA同等重要的国会目标，在本案中这些目标通过其最低工资条款体现。见29 U.S.C. §§ 202和206。 在本案中，我们行政认知到本申请提交时适用的联邦最低工资为每小时$7.25。8 并且，同样截至提交时，俄勒冈州设定了更高的最低工资，规定每小时$8.95。9 由于俄勒冈州最低工资高于联邦最低工资，适用较高的俄勒冈州标准。10 如果申请人的雇佣要约确如I-129表所示为每小时$6.47，则拟议薪资将违反联邦和州最低工资保护，因此该雇佣要约根据FLSA将无效。

3

3

Matter of I- Corp. Adopted Decision Accordingly, we decline to address the specialized knowledge issues in the Director’s decision. Instead, we will remand this matter to the Director to determine what wage would be paid to the Beneficiary. If the Director decides to request evidence to further develop the record, 11 she may ask the Petitioner to confirm whether it will pay the Beneficiary in Malaysian ringgits. The Director may also request additional evidence to include any employment contract or, if the written contract is not available, a summary of the terms of the proposed employment. The Director may also inquire into the means by which the Petitioner would pay the Beneficiary in Malaysian currency, the monetary value of “[h]ousing, travel, and relocation allowances,” and such other evidence that the Director may deem necessary. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(l)(3)(viii). If the Director determines that the Petitioner has not established, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the Beneficiary will be paid the required minimum wage, the petition cannot be approved. If the Director determines that the total compensation 12 offered meets or exceeds the required minimum wage, but that compensation is significantly lower than the Beneficiary’s peers or the particular industry, the Director may also consider that fact when re-evaluating the totality of the evidence relating to the Petitioner’s specialized knowledge claim. 13

Matter of I- Corp. 已采纳决定 因此，我们拒绝处理主任决定中的特殊知识问题。 相反，我们将此事项发回主任，以确定将向受益人支付何种工资。如果主任决定要求提供证据以进一步充实记录，11 她可以要求申请人确认其是否将以马来西亚林吉特向受益人支付工资。主任还可以要求提供额外证据，包括任何雇佣合同，或者，如果书面合同不可用，则提供拟议雇佣条款的摘要。主任还可以询问申请人以马来西亚货币向受益人支付工资的方式、“[h]ousing, travel, and relocation allowances”的货币价值，以及主任认为必要的其他此类证据。8 C.F.R. § 214.2(l)(3)(viii)。如果主任认定申请人未以优势证据证明受益人将获得所需最低工资，则申请不能获批。如果主任认定所提供的总报酬 12 达到或超过所需最低工资，但该报酬显著低于受益人的同侪或特定行业，主任在重新评估与申请人特殊知识主张相关的全部证据时也可以考虑该事实。13

II. CONCLUSION The burden of proof in this proceeding rests with the Petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. The evidence does not establish that the Petitioner will pay the Beneficiary a wage that meets or exceeds the required minimum wage as mandated by the FLSA. ORDER: The Director’s decision is withdrawn and the matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the foregoing opinion and for the entry of a new decision. Cite as Matter of I- Corp., Adopted Decision 2017-02 (AAO Apr. 12, 2017)

II. 结论 本程序中的举证责任由申请人承担。该法第291条，8 U.S.C. § 1361。证据不能证明申请人将向受益人支付达到或超过FLSA所要求的所需最低工资的工资。 命令： 主任的决定被撤回，此事项发回，以按照上述意见进行进一步程序并作出新决定。 引用为 Matter of I- Corp., Adopted Decision 2017-02 (AAO Apr. 12, 2017)

4

4