Karmali v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service
707 F.2d 408 (1983)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The statutory requirement for an L-1 intra-company transferee visa that an alien be employed continuously for one year by the petitioning entity (8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(L)) mandates that the full one-year period of employment must take place outside of the United States.
Facts:
- In November 1976, Gulamali Karmali, a Canadian citizen, began working for AF-CHIM, a Canadian corporation owned by his brother-in-law.
- Karmali's role was to assist in managing and investigating new holdings for AF-CHIM.
- In April 1977, Karmali's relatives advanced him money to purchase a motel, cafe, and campground in Bonners Ferry, Idaho.
- On July 20, 1977, after approximately eight months of employment in Canada, Karmali entered the United States to operate the newly purchased Idaho business on behalf of AF-CHIM.
- Karmali continued to manage the Idaho property from July to December 1977.
- On December 9, 1977, after Karmali had been employed by AF-CHIM for thirteen months (eight in Canada and five in the U.S.), AF-CHIM filed a petition for an intra-company transfer visa for him.
Procedural Posture:
- AF-CHIM filed a petition for an intra-company transfer visa on behalf of Karmali with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (Service).
- The Service's District Director denied the petition.
- AF-CHIM appealed the denial to the Regional Commissioner, who affirmed the District Director's decision.
- The Regional Commissioner subsequently denied AF-CHIM's motion for reconsideration.
- Karmali and AF-CHIM (appellants) filed a complaint in U.S. District Court against the Service (appellee), seeking a declaratory judgment.
- The magistrate judge granted summary judgment in favor of the Service.
- Karmali and AF-CHIM appealed the grant of summary judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the statutory requirement that an L-1 intra-company transferee visa applicant be 'employed continuously for one year' by the petitioning company require that the entire one-year period of employment take place outside the United States?
Opinions:
Majority - Choy
Yes. The statutory requirement for an L-1 intra-company transferee visa that an applicant be employed continuously for one year by the petitioning company requires that the employment occur abroad for the full one-year period. The court deferred to the Immigration and Naturalization Service's (Service) interpretation, finding it was not irrational or contrary to the statute's plain meaning. The court reasoned that the statutory language, which states an applicant 'has been employed continuously for one year' and 'seeks to enter the United States temporarily,' implies that the qualifying employment must precede entry into the U.S. This interpretation is strongly supported by the legislative history, specifically a House Judiciary Committee report which explicitly stated the process involves verifying 'prior employment of the individual for a continuous period of at least 1 year abroad.'
Analysis:
This decision establishes a bright-line rule for L-1 intra-company transferee visa eligibility, clarifying that the one-year prior employment requirement cannot be fulfilled by time spent working within the United States. It solidifies the principle of judicial deference to an administrative agency's reasonable interpretation of the statute it administers, especially when that interpretation is supported by clear legislative intent. The ruling prevents the use of other nonimmigrant statuses, such as a visitor visa, to 'piece together' the one-year requirement, thereby preserving the visa category's intended purpose of facilitating the transfer of established foreign employees.
Unlock the full brief for Karmali v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service