IN THIS GUIDE · Assignments spanning several U.S. worksites
Start with the L-1B eligibility and application overview
Create a worksite and duty map
List the expected locations, whether each belongs to the group or an unaffiliated client, and the work planned there. Include a reasonable description of time allocation and travel. The point is to explain the actual assignment, not to manufacture a percentage that appears favourable. Distinguish productive duties from transit or downtime.
Identify supervision across locations
Explain who assigns and evaluates work throughout the itinerary. A consistent employer manager may supervise across sites, but the daily arrangement must support that account. If different clients direct tasks, examine the actual balance of control. Physical movement between locations does not eliminate the offsite placement rules.
Explain a single specialised purpose
Show how the phases connect: for example, preparation, implementation and validation may form one assignment when supported by actual project evidence. Each material duty should fit the knowledge claim. Avoid using a broad travel itinerary to conceal routine staffing placements unrelated to the employer’s specialised product or service.
Review itinerary changes
Create an internal process for reviewing new locations, clients or materially different duties before deployment. Some changes may require immigration action; the answer depends on the facts. Keep contracts and assignment letters current so the company can explain the work actually performed, especially when client locations account for the primary assignment.
Name the entity in control at each stop
An itinerary lists places. The analysis needs entities. Beside each location, write the company that owns the site, the company that holds the contract, and the company whose manager directs the employee’s daily tasks. Those three are often different, and the third matters most. Hypothetical example: a warehouse robotics vendor sends a specialist to three distribution centres owned by one retail customer, under a contract signed with that customer’s logistics operator, and the employee reports to a project lead employed by the petitioner. Written that way, the offsite question can be assessed. Written as three site visits, it cannot. Where an employee is placed principally at a third party’s worksite, the petitioner must continue to control the work rather than supply labour for hire. State how instructions reach the employee, who evaluates performance, and who may change the task list. Preserve the emails and assignment records that show it, because control asserted and control exercised are examined together.
Separate the product boundary from the customer’s operation
Specialized knowledge attaches to the petitioner’s product, service, equipment, techniques or management, and the itinerary should show the employee working on that side of the line. Describe what belongs to your company at each site: the control software, the calibration method, the integration approach. Then describe what belongs to the customer: the building, the inventory process, the staff being trained. When the two blur, the assignment starts to look like general staffing. A specialist who spends most of an installation reconfiguring the customer’s shift patterns is doing the customer’s work, whatever the contract says. Record the boundary in the statement of work instead of leaving it to be inferred. The classification carries a five-year maximum, and assignments that drift across the line early tend to be hardest to explain at extension. Where a phase genuinely serves both sides, say so and identify who supervises it.
Sources reviewed 2026-09-07. This guide covers a preparation focus; it is not an individual eligibility assessment.