Potentially. For work primarily at an unaffiliated employer’s site, the petitioner must retain the required control and supervision, and the arrangement must involve a product or service needing knowledge specific to the petitioner rather than essentially supplying labour for hire.
Test both parts of the arrangement
A company badge or payroll record alone does not settle either question. Examine who actually directs the employee and why the client purchased the service. Some client input can be compatible with employer control, but the full facts must support the offsite requirements as well as ordinary L-1B eligibility.
Working at a client's office is common and is not prohibited in itself; what matters is how the arrangement is structured and evidenced. Test it against both limbs rather than one. Supervision is the first: identify in practice who assigns the work, who sets priorities when they conflict, who reviews output, who handles performance and who the employee turns to for a decision.
The second limb asks what the petitioner is contractually providing, and whether performing it requires knowledge specific to the petitioner rather than general capability. Where the honest answer to the first is that the client runs the employee's working life, or where the contract simply supplies a person for a rate, restructuring the description will not address the difficulty. Establish the position from the contract and the working reality before the transfer is planned.