No. The actual placement, control and service connection matter. Short duration does not automatically make an otherwise prohibited arrangement permissible.
Review the real conditions of the proposed work
For principally unaffiliated-site employment, either prohibited control or an essentially labor-for-hire arrangement can defeat eligibility. Describe the actual tasks and supervision before relying on the rotation schedule.
A change in duties, client placement, or the employing entity can affect the basis of the case, and the revised facts should be reviewed rather than assuming the original petition or plan already covers the new arrangement. Establish the qualifying corporate relationship, collect foreign-employment proof, complete the knowledge explanation, and resolve any client-site control issue before the planned filing date. Prepare a placement timeline showing remaining L-1B time, assignment dates, client location, petitioner supervision, deliverables, and every change from the approved duties. Identify which facts require fresh review and whether further filings are needed before the new activity begins, and keep the actual approval and status dates visible rather than relying on an external delivery deadline. The common mistake is treating a customer deadline, approval notice, or unchanged title as proof that a materially revised placement remains covered.