remanded EB-1B Case: Research

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rrn. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: LIN 03 238 50196 Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: :,; - 1 5 :11)1: 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
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. 5 1153(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. 
\J 
6;lobet-t P. Wiernann, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
LXN 03 238 50196 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The decision of the director will be 
withdrawn and the petition will be remanded for further action and consideration. 
The petitioner is a university. 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. $ 1153(b)(l)(B). The petitioner 
initially sought to employ the beneficiary in the United States as a research associate, but subsequently 
promoted the petitioner to assistant research scientist. 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 submits a job offer dated September 2, 2002, for a position "without an end date" and 
evidence that her current position has no end date. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) 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 
(m) 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 full-time in 
research activities and has achieved documented accomplishments in an 
academic field. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(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: 
LIN 03 238 50196 
Page 3 
(A) A United States university or institution of higher leaming 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 leaming 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 full-time in research 
positions, and that it has achieved documented accomplishments in an academic field. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(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. 
On Part 6 of the petition, the petitioner indicated that the proposed employment was a permanent posjtion. The 
petitioner submitted a letter from John W. Woodring, Payroll Supervisor I1 addressed to "Whom It May 
Concern" veritjling the petitioner's "permanent employment" as a "Research Associate 11." On July 30, 2004, 
the director requested evidence that the petitioner had extended a permanent job offer to the beneficiary. 
In response, the petitioner submitted a letter addressed to the petitioner dated June 23, 2004 offering the 
petitioner a position as an assistant research scientist. The director determined that this letter did not ccpnstitute a 
permanent job offer and was not the same job offer as that listed on the petition. 
As stated above, the letter submitted on appeal, dated prior to the filing of the petition, offers the beneficiary a 
position "without an end date." As such, at the time of filing the beneficiary had been offered and was worlung 
in a permanent position. On appeal, the petitioner also demonstrates that the beneficiary's current position is 
permanent. The record is clear that this new position is a promotion, and not an unrelated position with 
unrelated duties. Thus, the petitioner has overcome the director's concerns. 
Therefore, this matter will be remanded for consideration of whether the beneficiary has international 
recognition, the statutory standard for outstanding researchers. Specifically, the director may wish to consider 
whether the petitioner has established that the associations of which she is a member require outstanding 
achievements of their members and whether the letters from her immediate circle of colleagues and articles 
without evidence of citation are indicative of international recognition. 
As always in these proceedings, the burden of proof rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 
U.S.C. 9 1361. 
ORDER: The director's decision is withdrawn. The petition is remanded to the director for further action 
in accordance with the foregoing and entry of a new decision which, if adverse to the petitioner, 
is to be certified to the Administrative Appeals Office for review.