The temporary nature of the replacement is not the complete legal test.
Show how the organizations actually operate
Explain who now performs the foreign work and how the qualifying business continues. Separately establish the applicant’s qualifying history and primarily managerial or executive US role rather than rely on the replacement’s job title.
Build the analysis from the transferee outward. Verify the required continuous foreign year in the three-year lookback, then document the eligible organizational relationship, ongoing foreign business and, unless the U.S. operation is a new office, ongoing U.S. business. Next, describe the US authority and reporting structure that make the work primarily managerial or executive. An interim Canadian replacement neither defeats nor establishes those elements; the error is using that person’s title as a shortcut for the applicant’s history and future duties. If the US operation is a new office, show that the qualifying foreign year was managerial or executive, that sufficient premises have been secured, that the foreign entity has the financial ability to remunerate the beneficiary and commence US business, and that the intended operation will support the qualifying position within one year, because the initial new-office approval is limited to one year. Track prior L time as well, since L-1A generally has a seven-year maximum.
Hypothetical example: A Saint-Ambroise sawmill operations manager is replaced temporarily by two supervisors while a permanent hire is sought. The company charts which decisions each supervisor assumes, proves the manager’s preceding managerial year, and supplies ownership records connecting the Canadian and US entities. Its US plan shows who handles production tasks so the transferee can direct operations. The divided interim handover is explained honestly instead of being portrayed as a disqualifying vacancy or a completed permanent appointment.