MATTER OF S-W-0- (USA), INC.

Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office

DATE: SEPT. 21, 2016

APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICKCENTER DECISION

PETITION: FORM I-J29, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER

The Petitioner is a Hindu temple that seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a Hindu priest (Pujari). This nonimmigrant religious worker classification allows non-profit religious organizations, or their affiliates, to temporarily employ foreign nationals as ministers or in other religious occupations or vocations in the United States. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(R), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(R). .

The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition, finding that the Petitioner did not establish that it is a bona fide non-profit organization or affiliated with one. She also found that it did not establish that the Beneficiary is a member of the Petitioner's religious denomination or that he is qualified for the proffered position.

The matter is now before us on appeal. The Petitioner argues that it is a bona fide non-profit organization with its own tax exemption number and explains why its address differs from those listed on. two letters from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the record. It further contends that the Beneficiary has been a member of the denomination and is qualified for the proffered position, having been appointed as a Hindu priest at its temple in Canada in 201 0. The Petitioner submits additional evidence on appeal.

Upon de novo review, we will sustain the appeal.

I. LAW

Non-profit religious organizations may petition for foreign nationals to work in the United States for up to five years to perform religious work as ministers, in religious vocations, or in other religious occupations. The petitioning organization must establish, among other things, that the foreign national beneficiary has been a member of a religious denomination for at least the two-year period before the date the petition is filed. See generally section 101(a)(15)(R) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(R).

(b)(6)

Matter ofS-W-0- (USA), Inc.

II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND EVIDENCE OF RECORD

On the religious worker petition, the Petitioner listed its address as New Jersey, and indicated that it sought to employ the Beneficiary as a Hindu priest to work in its New Jersey, location. It stated that it is known as and that its parent organization is India. It indicated that it is in the same sect and denomination as India and Canada: It maintained that the Beneficiary has dedicated his life to the denomination/temple and holds the religious title of "Hindu pri[ e ]st (Pujari)." It further stated he has taken courses in

religion and culture, and has been trained in' the temple by monks, senior saints, and gurus for numerous years.

In support of the petition, the Petitioner submitted, in part: the Beneficiary's certificate of completion for participating in "Satsang Parikshan- 2014;" copies ofiRS tax-exempt determination letters; a copy of the Petitioner's financial statement for 2013; copies of the Petitioner's brochures; the Petitioner' s Minutes and By Laws; ;1 copy of an N.J.; ___ citations and a proclamation from the Office of the Mayor, New Jersey; a copy of the Beneficiary' s marriage certificate; and copies of his wife's and son's passports.

The Director issued a request for evidence (RFE) seeking additional documentation of the Petitioner's non-profit status, the religious denomination, and the proffered position. In response, the Petitioner submitted, among other things: letters from India; a certificate of training showing the Beneficiary completed "poojari;" and copies of the minutes from the first meeting

held in its new location in

The Director denied the petition. She concluded that the Petitioner did not establish it is a bona fide non-profit organization, or that it was affiliated with one, noting that the two letters from the IRS in the record were sent to addresses that differed from the address listed on the petition. Moreover, the Director found the Petitioner did not show that the Beneficiary belongs to its religious denomination or that he is qualified for the proffered position. She stated, in part, that the petitioning organization did not sufficiently respond to the RFE which sought evidence of "the two locations listed on both 501(c)(3) notices" and the Beneficiary) membership in the foreign religious organization. She maintained that the letters from Canada and India did "not reference the two organizations whose letters from the IRS were used as evidence with the filing of the petition." In addition, the Director found that a 2014 certificate in the record, submitted to show the Beneficiary' s

·qualifications, appeared to contradict the assertion that the Beneficiary had been serving as a priest since August of 2010. She stated that there was no evidence to show the Beneficiary was appointed as a Hindu priest in August of 2010. The Director further noted that the Beneficiary is married despite the religious denomination's requirement of celibacy.

On appeal, the Petitioner argues that it is a bona fide non-profit religious organization and that the IRS letters were issued before it changed its address. The Petitioner also explains its relationship

stands for

2

(b)(6)

Matter ofS-W-0- (USA), Inc.

with its parent organization, India, and contends the Beneficiary is qualified for the proffered position. It submits additional evidence on appeal, including a copy of an IRS filing receipt showing its change of address and a copy of the letter appointing the Beneficiary as a priest/Pujari on August 1,2010.

III. ANALYSIS

A. Bona Fide Non-Profit Organization

The regulation at 8 C.F .R. § 214.2(r)(9)(i) requires the Petitioner to submit a "currently valid determination letter from the IRS showing that the organization is a tax-exempt organization .... "In this case, the record includes two IRS tax exemption determination letters for the petitioning organization. One of the letters shows an address in New York. The other letter uses an address in New York. The Director stated that the Petitioner listed an address in

New Jersey, on the petition. She concluded that the Petitioner did not sufficiently establish its own tax-exempt status or that it is affiliated with a bona fide tax-exempt religious organization.

The Petitioner explains on appeal that it hired an attorney to assist with filing a certificate of incorporation and for IRS tax exemption. It contends that, at the time, it did not own property and, therefore, used the address of one of its initial directors in It clarifies that the second letter from the IRS was merely a copy that was sent to the attorney at his address in It maintains that it has since purchased property in which is now its official address. The Petitioner further states that all of the relevant documentation in the record shows the same employer identification number (EIN).

The record supports the Petitioner's contentions. The Petitioner's certificate of incorporation shows that the petitioning organization used the address of one of its directors for service of process when it filed for incorporation in August of2002. The Petitioner's bylaws show that it also used this address as its principal office. Because its official address was in . the IRS letter was addressed to the Petitioner in It is hot unusual for the IRS to address its letter granting an organization tax-exempt status to a location other than the physical location of the requesting entity, especially when the application for exe~ption is filed by an attorney, or in this case, where the Petitioner has identified an "official address." The IRS letter specifically stated that a copy was also being sent to the Petitioner's attorney, and a second letter in the file confirms that a copy was sent to the attorney at his address in

On appeal, the Petitioner submits a copy of an IRS filing receipt showing that in October of 2010, the petitioning organization notified the IRS of its change in address to the address that is listed on the religious worker petition. It further submitted Internet printouts from the IRS's list of tax-exempt organizations confirming that the Petitioner is tax exempt. The record also includes Internet printouts from the New York State Department of State's Division of Corporations further confirming that the Petitioner officially changed its address to Both IRS letters and the IRS Internet printout show the same EIN, which matches the EIN listed on the petition. Therefore,

3

(b)(6)

Matter ofS-W-0- (USA), Inc.

the record includes a currently valid IRS determination letter showing that the petitioning organization is a tax-exempt organization. We find the Petitioner has sufficiently established it is a bona fide non-profit religious organization in the United States. The Director's finding to the contrary is withdrawn.

B. The Beneficiary's Membership and Qualifications

The regulation at 8 CFR 214.2(r)(l )(i) requires that the Beneficiary has been "a member of a religious denomination having a bona fide non-profit religious organization in the United States for at least two years immediately preceding the time of application for admission." Denominational membership is defined in 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(r)(3) as "membership during at least the two-year period immediately preceding the filing date of the petition, in the same type of religious denomination as the United States religious organization where the alien will work."

In his initial letter submitted with the petition, the director of the petitioning organization explained that the organization is a Hindu temple that follows the philosophy and propagation of the teachings of The record includes ample documentation describing this religious denomination and the Beneficiary's long-time membership in it. For instance, the record includes a comprehensive guide to and a brochure which states that "common goal is to reach

These documents state that the denomination's international headquarters are in India and list several international temples and international centers, including Canada as well as the petitioning organization's locations in and The record also includes the Petitioner's bylaws and its certificate of incorporation which describe the petitioning entity as a Hindu temple dedicated to the beliefs and teachings of The record also includes an ordinance from the Municipal Council of the recognizing the Petitioner as the first foreign branch of India. 2

Several letters from India confirm that the Beneficiary has been a member of since 1998, has been an active member of Canada since 2006, and was appointed as a Hindu priest in 2010. According to India, the Beneficiary is being transferred from Canada to the petitioning organization as his services are needed at its location. Letters from the director of the petitioning organization and the director of Canada affirm that the Beneficiary was appointed as a Hindu priest of Canada in 2010, and has performed all of the functions of a Hindu priest, including funeral services, marriage ceremonies, and the ritual sacrifices required for each deity. The letter from Canada included a detailed description of the Beneficiary's daily duties and schedule, stating that as "a Hindu priest his duties relate to the core of Hindu

Religion," including the bathing rituals of propagating the principals of and lecturing about the teachings of

2 The Office of the Mayor, also issued several citations and a proclamation to the petitioning organization, recognizing the contributions it has made in as well as in India.

4

(b)(6)

Matter ofS-W-0- (USA), Inc.

Furthermore, on appeal, the Petitioner submits a copy of a letter from Canada, dated August 1, 2010, confirming the Beneficiary's appointment as a Hindu priest/Pujari. The Petitioner also explains on appeal that the 2014 certificate that was granted to the Beneficiary is not a requirement to being a priest, but rather, is an exam that is offered every year for devotees to test their spiritual and ritual knowledge. The record contains a certificate of training, dated October 1, 2010, certifying that the Beneficiary successfully completed a training of "poojari," permitting him to "independently serve the idol of at any teniple of in India/abroad." The certificate specifies he completed the one-month training at Canada and was trained by Pujari saints to perform "all the rituals ... of "

To the extent the Director raised the issue of the Beneficiary's celibacy, according to the director of Canada, the Beneficiary took the vow of celibacy in August of 2008, and the Petitioner has

accepted the Beneficiary' s qualifications as a minister. See 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(r)(10)(1). Considering the entire record, we find that the Petitioner has established by a preponderance of the evidence that the Beneficiary has been a member of its religious denomination for at least the requisite two-year period and is qualified for the proffered position.

IV. CONCLUSION

The Petitioner has established that it is a bona fide non-profit religious organization, that the Beneficiary has been a member of its religious denomination for at least two years before the I

petition was filed, and that he is qualified for the proffered position.

It is the Petitioner' s burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; MatterofOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 (BIA 2013). Here, that burden has been met.

ORDER: The appeal is sustained.

Cite as Matter ofS-W-0- (USA), Inc, ID# 12245 (AAO Sept. 21, 2016)

5