dismissed EB-1B Case: Oceanic And Atmospheric Sciences

identifying da~ &leted t~ 
prevent clearly unwmted 
invasion of personal privacy 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W.. Rrn. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: BAY 1 1 2006 
LIN 04 164 52466 
IN RE: 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as Outstanding Professor or Researcher Pursuant to 
Section 203(b)(l)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 11 53(b)(l)(B) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
7Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition, which is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be 
dismissed. 
The petitioner is an institution of higher learning. It seeks to classify the beneficiary as an outstanding 
researcher pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 
5 1153(b)(l)(B). The petitioner seeks to employ the beneficiary in the United States as an assistant 
professor/senior research. The director determined that the petitioner had not established that it had 
offered the beneficiary a permanent job as of the date of filing. 
On appeal, the petitioner asserts that it has provided sufficient evidence of a permanent job offer. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(I) Priority Workers. -- Visas shall first be made available . . . to qualified immigrants who are 
aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): 
(B) Outstanding Professors and Researchers. -- An alien is described in this 
subparagraph if -- 
(i) the alien is recognized internationally as outstanding in a specific 
academic area, 
(ii) the alien has at least 3 years of experience in teaching or research in the 
academic area, and 
(iii) the alien seeks to enter the United States -- 
(I) 
 for a tenured position (or tenure-track position) within a 
university or institution of higher education to teach in the 
academic area, 
(11) 
 for a comparable position with a university or institution of 
higher education to conduct research in the area, or 
(111) for a comparable position to conduct research in the area 
with a department, division, or institute of a private employer, if 
the department, division, or institute employs at least 3 persons 
hll-time in research activities and has achieved documented 
accomplishments in an academic field. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(i)(3)(iii) provides that a petition must be accompanied by: 
An offer of employment from a prospective United States employer. 
 A labor 
certification is not required for this classification. The offer of employment shall be in 
the form of a letter from: 
(A) A United States university or institution of higher learning offering the alien 
a tenured or tenure-track teaching position in the alien's academic field; 
(B) A United States university or institution of higher learning offering the alien 
a permanent research position in the alien's academic field; or 
(C) A department, division, or institute of a private employer offering the alien a 
permanent research position in the alien's academic field. The department, 
division, or institute must demonstrate that it employs at least three persons hll- 
time in research positions, and that it has achieved documented 
accomplishments in an academic field. 
(Emphasis added.) Black's Law Dictionary 11 11 (7th ed. 1999) defines "offer" as "the act or an 
instance of presenting something for acceptance" or "a display of willingness to enter into a contract 
on specified terms, made in a way that would lead a reasonable person to understand that an 
acceptance, having been sought, will result in a binding contract." Black's Law Dictionary does not 
define "offeror" or "offeree." ALM's online law dictionary, available at www.law.com, defines offer 
as "a specific proposal to enter into an agreement with another. An offer is essential to the formation 
of an enforceable contract. An offer and acceptance of the offer creates the contract." Significantly, 
the same dictionary defines offeree as "a person or entity to whom an offer to enter into a contract is 
made by another (the offeror)," and offeror as "a person or entity who makes a specific proposal to 
another (the offeree) to enter into a contract." (Emphasis added.) 
In light of the above, we concur with the director that the ordinary meaning of an "offer" requires that it 
be made to the offeree, not a third party. As such, regulatory language requiring that the offer be made 
"to the beneficiary" would simply be redundant. Thus, a letter addressed to Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (CIS) afJirming the beneficiary's employment is not a job offer within the 
ordinary meaning of that phrase. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(i)(2), provides, in pertinent part: 
Permanent, in reference to a research position, means either tenured, tenure track, or for 
a term of indefinite or unlimited duration, and in which the employee will ordinarily 
have an expectation of continued employment unless there is good cause for 
termination. 
Page 4 
On Part 6 of the petition, the petitioner indicated that the proposed employment was a permanent 
position. The petitioner submitted a letter from Dean of the petitioning university, 
addressed to Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS), asserting that the petitioner "is renewing the 
full-time appointment of [the beneficiary] as an Assistant Professor (Senior ~esearch)."- 
characterizes the position as "long-term" and expresses the petitioner's "every expectation that [the 
beneficiary] will for an unlimited duration." The petitioner also submitted an 
"addendum" from Vice Provost for Academic Affairs and International Programs, 
asserting that the beneficiary's position cannot be tenure or tenure-track because it is a pure research 
position. 
 Thus, the beneficiary's position is defined as "fixed-term." 
 These documents do not 
constitute a job offer from the petitioner to the beneficiary. On June 22, 2005, the director requested 
evidence that the petitioner had kxtended a permanent job offer to the beneficiary. 
In response, the petitioner submitted a letter addressed to the benefici 
 dated Au ust 8 2005 intended 
to "clarify" his employment. The letter is jointly signed byhand-, Vice 
Provost for Academic Affairs and International Programs. The letter asserts that the beneficiary has a 
- 
"non-tenure track, full-time renewable 12-month position," but that the petitioner "hlly expects to 
continue your employment for an unlimited or indefinite duration unless you are terminated in 
accordance with rules and regulation governing faculty appointments at" the petitioning university. 
The petitioner did not provide copies of those rules and regulations. 
The director first stated that the petitioner was "silent" as to whether the employment was permanent, 
but then noted that the beneficiary's employment is clearly fixed-term with annual renewal possible. 
The director concluded that the offer was not for a permanent position as defined in the regulations. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a new letter from . She asserts that previous 
letters were not "silent" on the petitioner's intention. Rather, they expressed an intent to employ the 
beneficiary indefinitely. The Vice Provost further asserts that the petitioner does not file immigrant 
petitions for those it does not intend to employ long-term. She asserts that the beneficiary is a co- 
Principal Investigator on four federal grants that will secure his full salary for the next three years. The 
Vice Provost indicates that the College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences (COAS) at the 
petitioning university "provides a pathway to tenure for professors in research classifications upon 
recommendation from the Dean of the College and the scholar's discipline." Further, COAS policy 
states that promotion considerations for research faculty are the same as those for tenure-track faculty, 
both of which are limited to 12-month fixed-term appointments. 
We acknowledge that that the statute allows the job offer to be for a research position comparable to 
tenure or tenure-track. The regulation provides a more specific definition that binds us in this matter. 
Specifically, the job offer must be for a position where the beneficiary will ordinarily have an 
expectation of continued employment unless there is good cause for termination. As stated above, the 
petitioner did not provide its official termination policies. Thus, we cannot evaluate whether the 
petitioner's decision not to renew an annual contract is discretionary or whether it must show good 
cause when it fails to renew an annual contract. Without such information, we cannot determine 
Page 5 
whether the beneficiary can be terminated without good cause and, thus, whether the job offer is 
qualifjmg. 
Subsequently, the petitioner submitted evidence that it has now offered the beneficiary a tenure-track 
position. The petitioner itself must be accompanied by a qualifying job offer. Evidence that the 
petitioner offered the beneficiary a qualifjmg job after the date of filing is not evidence of the 
beneficiary's eligibility as of that date. Rather, such evidence may serve as evidence in a future petition 
with a new priority date. See 8 C.F.R. 8 103.2@)(12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 49 (Reg. 
Cornm. 1971). 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. 8 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be 
dismissed. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.