dismissed EB-2 Case: Computer Science

identifying data deleted to 
prev~nt clearly ilnWarranted 
mV8SlOn ofpe . rsonal prrvacy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Servicc~ 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
PUBLIC COpy 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
DATE: OFFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
JUL 1 S ZU" 
INRE: 
PETITION: 
Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced 
Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.c. § 1153(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents 
related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please be advised that 
any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. The 
specific requirements for filing such a request can be found at 8 c.F.R. § 103.5. All motions must be 
submitted to the office that originally decided your case by filing a Form 1-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, 
with a fee of $630. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i) requires that any motion must be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
r" 
(-yf)~ 
~ 
Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant 
visa petition, which is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal 
will be dismissed. 
The petitioner is a telecommunications business. It seeks to employ the beneficiary permanently in the 
United States as . 203(b )(2) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.c. § 1 1 53(b)(2). As required by statute, a Form ETA 750,1 
Application for Alien Employment Certification approved by the Department of Labor (DOL), 
accompanied the petition. Upon reviewing the petition, the director determined that the beneficiary 
did not qualify for the second preference classification. Specifically, the director determined that the 
beneficiary did not possess a four-year bachelor's degree in computer science or information 
systems. 
On appeal, counsel submits a brief and additional evidcnce. Counsel asserts that the beneficiary 
possesses a foreign equivalent degree to a U.S. bachelor's degree. As will be discussed below, 
counsel relies on credentials evaluations from four separate sources and urges U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) not to rely upon the Electronic Database for Global Education 
(EDGE) created by the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers 
(AACRAO) when analyzing the beneficiary's educational background. Counsel states that no 
authority has accredited EDGE as the definitive source for foreign degree evaluations. Upon 
reviewing the record as a whole, the AAO concurs with the director's conclusion that the 
beneficiary's education and work experience cannot support classification as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree, the only classification before the AAO in this matter. Thus, 
the AAO will uphold the director's decision. 
In pertinent part, section 203(b)(2) of the Act provides immigrant classification to members of the 
professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent and whose services are sought by an 
employer in the United States. An advanced degree is a United States academic or professional 
degree or a foreign equivalent degree above the baccalaureate level. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). The 
regulation further states: "A United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree 
followed by at least five years of progressive experience in the specialty shall be considered the 
equivalent of a master's degree. If a doctoral degree is customarily required by the specialty, the 
alien must have a United States doctorate or a foreign equivalent degree." ld. 
beneficiary also has over ten years of 
profession obtained before the priority datc 
date in which the petitioner filed the alien employment certification with 
Prior to his university study, the beneficiary completed a two-year 
postsecondary educational program. The beneficiary obtained a matriculation exemption and did not 
need to take an exam required for some students prior to starting university study. Counsel asserts 
that the beneficiary completed the equivalent of one year of nniversity level study as part of this two-
I After March 28, 2005, the correct form to apply for alien employment certification is the Form ETA 9089. 
Page 3 
year post secondary program. The issue in this case is whether the beneficiary's post secondary 
education, if any, and three-year Bachelor of Science degree constitute a foreign degree equivalent to 
a U.S. baccalaureate degree. 
Eligibility for the Classification Sought 
As noted above, DOL certified the Form ETA 750 in this matter. DOL's role is limited to determining 
whether there are sufficient workers who are able, willing, qualified, and available and whether the 
employment of the alien will adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the 
United States similarly employed. Section 212(a)(5)(A)(i) of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 656.1(a). 
It is significant that none of the above inquiries assigned to DOL, or the remaining regulations 
implementing these duties under 20 C.F.R. § 656, involve a determination as to whether or not the alien 
is qualified for a specific immigrant classification or even the job offered. This fact has not gone 
unnoticed by federal circuit courts. See Tongatapu Woodcraft Hawaii, Ltd. v. Feldman, 736 F. 2d 
1305, 1309 (9th Cir. 1984); Madany v. Smith, 696 F.2d 1008, 1012-1013 (D.C. Cir. 1983). 
A United States baccalaureate degree is generally found to require four years of education. Matter 
(!f'Shah, 17 I&N Dec. 244 (Reg'l Comm'r 1977). This decision involved a petition filed under 
8 U.S.c. § 1153(a)(3) as amended in 1976. At that time, this section provided: 
Visas shall next be made available ... to qualified immigrants who are members of 
the professions .... 
The Act added section 203(b)(2)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)(A), which provides: 
Visas shall be made available ... to qualified immigrants who are members of the 
professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent .... 
Significantly, the statutory language used prior to Matter of Shah, 17 I&N Dec. at 244 is identical to 
the statutory language used subsequent to that decision but for the requirement that the immigrant 
hold an advanced degree or its equivalent. The Joint Explanatory Statement of the Committee of 
Conference, published as part of the House of Representatives Conference Report on the Act, 
provides that "[ in 1 considering equivalency in category 2 advanced degrees, it is anticipated that the 
alien must have a bachelor's degree with at least five years progressive experience in the 
professions." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 955, 101" Cong., 2nd Sess. 1990, 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 6784, 1990 
WL 201613 at *6786 (Oct. 26, 1990). 
At the time of enactment of section 203(b )(2) of the Act in 1990, it had been almost thirteen years 
since Matter of Shah was issued. Congress is presumed to have intended a four-year degree when it 
stated that an alien "must have a bachelor's degree" when considering equivalency for second 
preference immigrant visas. The AAO must assume that Congress was aware of the agency's 
previous treatment of a "bachelor's degree" under the Act when the new classification was enacted 
and did not intend to alter the agency's interpretation of that term. See Lorillard v. Pons, 434 U.S. 
Page 4 
575,580-81 (1978) (Congress is presumed to be aware of administrative and judicial interpretations 
where it adopts a new law incorporating sections of a prior law). In fact, the Senate Conference 
Report for the Act presumes that a baccalaureate is a "4-year course of undergraduate study." 
S. Rep. No. 101-55 at 20 (1989). See also 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60900 (Nov. 29, 1991) (an alien 
must have at least a bachelor's degree). 
In 1991, when the final rule for 8 C.F.R. § 204.5 was published in the Federal Register, the 
Immigration and Naturalization Service (the Service), responded to criticism that the regulation 
required an alien to have a bachelor's degree as a minimum and that the regulation did not allow for 
the substitution of experience for education. After reviewing section 121 of the Immigration Act of 
1990, Pub. L. 101-649 (1990), and the Joint Explanatory Statement of the Committee of Conference, 
the Service specifically noted that both the Act and the legislative history indicate that an alien must 
have at least a bachelor's degree: 
The Act states that, in order to qualify under the second classification, alien members 
of the professions must hold "advanced degrees or their equivalent." As the 
legislative history ... indicates, the equivalent of an advanced degree is "a bachelor's 
degree with at least five years progressive experience in the professions." Because 
neither the Act nor its legislative history indicates that bachelor's or advanced degrees 
must be United States degrees, the Service will recognize foreign equivalent degrees. 
But both the Act and its legislative history make clear that, in order to qualify as a 
professional under the third classification or to have experience equating to an 
advanced degree under the second, an alien must have at least a bachelor's degree. 
56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60900 (Nov. 29,1991) (emphasis added). 
There is no provision in the statute or the regulations that would allow a beneficiary to qualify under 
section 203(b )(2) of the Act as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with 
anything less than a full baccalaureate degree (plus the requisite five years of progressive post 
baccalaureate experience in the specialty). More specifically, a three-year bachelor's degree will not 
be considered to be the "foreign equivalent degree" to a United States baccalaureate degree. Matter 
of Shah, 17 I&N Dec. at 245. Where the analysis of the beneficiary's credentials relies on work 
experience alone or a combination of multiple lesser degrees, the result is the "equivalent" of a 
bachelor's degree rather than a "foreign equivalent degree.,,2 In order to have experience and 
education equating to an advanced degree under section 203(b)(2) of the Act, the beneficiary must 
have a single degree that is the "foreign equivalent degree" to a United States baccalaureate degree 
(plus the requisite five years of progressive experience in the specialty). 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
2 Compare 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5) (defining for purposes of a nonimmigrant visa classification, the 
"equivalence to completion of a college degree" as including, in certain cases, a specific combination of 
education and experience). The regulations pertaining to the immigrant classification sought in this matter do 
not contain similar language. 
Page 5 
The degree must also be from a college or university. Specifically, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B) requires the submission of an "ofTtcial academic record showing that the alien 
has a United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree" (plus evidence of five years 
of progressive experience in the specialty). For classification as a member of the professions, the 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(\)(3)(ii)(C) requires the submission of "an ofTtcial college or 
university record showing the date the baccalaureate degree was awarded and the area of 
concentration of study." The AAO cannot conclude that the evidence required to demonstrate that 
an alien is an advanced degree professional is any less than the evidence required to show that the 
alien is a professional. To do so would undermine the congressionally mandated classification 
scheme by allowing a lesser evidentiary standard for the more restrictive visa classification. 
Silverman v. Eastrich Multiple investor Fund, L.P., 51 F. 3d 28, 31 (3cd Cir. 1995) quoted in APWU 
v. Potter, 343 F.3d 619, 626 (2nd Cir. Sep 15,2003) (the basic tenet of statutory construction, to give 
effect to all provisions, is equally applicable to regulatory construction). 
Moreover, the commentary accompanying the proposed advanced degree professional regulation 
specifically states that a "baccalaureate means a bachelor's degree received .trom a co/lege or 
university, or an equivalent degree." (Emphasis added.) 56 Fed. Reg. 30703, 30306 (July 5, 1991). 
Compare 8 C.F .R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A) (relating to aliens of exceptional ability requiring the 
submission of "an official academic record showing that the alien has a degree, diploma. certificate 
or similar award from a college, university, school or other institution of learning relating to the 
area of exceptional ability"). 
The director stated in his decision that he had consulted EDGE and that EDGE indicates that a senior 
certificate with a matriculation exemption represents attainment of a level of education comparable 
to completion of senior high school in the United States. The director further stated that EDGE 
indicates a three-year Bachelor of Science in South Africa is equivalent to three years of university 
study in the United States. On appeal, counsel urges USCIS not to rely upon EDGE when analyzing 
the beneficiary's educational background. 
Counsel further states that EDGE has not been established through any particular accreditation to be 
the definitive source for foreign degree evaluations. According to its website, AACRAO, which 
created EDGE is "a nonprofit, voluntary, professional association of more than 11,000 higher 
education admissions and registration professionals who represent approximately 2,600 institutions 
and agencies in the United States and in over 40 countries." See http:iL~vw}Y,gta~Iao.Qr!.(/Abou1: 
AACRAO.aspx (accessed July 15,2011 and incorporated into the record of proceeding). Its mission 
"is to provide professional development, guidelines and voluntary standards to be used by higher 
education otlicials regarding the best practices in records management, admissions, enrollment 
management, administrative information technology and student services." Id. In Confluence Intern., 
inc. v. Holder, 2009 WL 825793 (D. Minn. March 27, 2009), a federal district court determined that the 
AAO provided a rational explanation for its reliance on information provided by AACRAO to support 
its decision. 
According to the login page, EDG E is "a web-based resource for the evaluation of foreign 
educational credentials" that is continually updated and revised by staff and members of AACRAO. 
Page 6 
http://aacraoedgc.aacrao.org/index.php (ac:ce:ssed 
proceeding). In Tiseo Group, Inc. v. Napolitano, 2010 WL 3464314 (E.D.Mich. August 30, 2010), a 
federal district court found that USCIS had properly weighed the evaluations submitted and the 
information obtained from EDGE to conclude that the alien's three-year foreign "baccalaureate" and 
foreign "Master's" degree were comparable to a U.S. bachelor's degree. In Sunshine Rehab 
Services, Inc., 2010 WL 3325442 (E.D.Mich. August 20, 2010), a federal district court upheld a 
US CIS conclusion that the alien's three-year bachelor's degree was not a foreign equivalent degree 
to a U.S. bachelor's degree. Specifically, the court concluded that uscrs was entitled to prefer the 
information in EDGE and did not abuse its discretion in reaching its conclusion. The court also 
noted that the labor certification itself required a degree and did not allow for the combination of 
education and experience. The reasoning in these decisions is persuasive. 
The AAO disagrees with counsel's assertion that EDGE's lack of "accreditation" is relevant. The 
content listed within EDGE's website is peer reviewed. Counsel has not provided any examples of 
other accredited evaluation tools nor any description of how such a tool might be accredited. 
Counsel does not identify an entity that exists to provide such accreditation to organizations like 
AACRAO or evaluation tools like EDGE. Thus, counsel has failed to explain why the issue of 
whether EDGE is accredited or not is relevant to the matter at hand. 
In the section related to the South African educational system, EDGE provides that a Bachelor of 
Science degree is three years in duration and represents attainment of a level of education 
comparable to three years of university study in the United States3 This information is inconsistent 
with the credentials evaluations that counsel submitted. 
Counsel has submitted evaluations from four separate sources. Each evaluation concludes that the 
beneficiary possesses the equivalent of a U.S. Bachelor of Science degree with a dual major in 
computer science and mathematics. 
Counsel submitted an evaluation from Barry Silberzweig of the Trustforte Corporation dated 
November 20, 2000. Mr. Silberzweig indicates that he is a member of AACRAO and lists the 
International Academic Credentials Handbook, Volume I (1988) by AACRAO and NAFSA as one 
of his references. He states that he bases his analysis on the beneficiary's transcript, the 
beneficiary's Bachelor of Science program's reputation, the number of years of required study, the 
nature of the beneficiary's courses, the beneficiary's grades, and the required hours of coursework. 
__ further states that the beneficiary "completed both the general studies and 
~" leading to his baccalaureate and that the general courses included "entry-level 
the social sciences." The AAO has reviewed the beneficiary's transcript 
beneficiary's transcript notably lists no such courses in English 
1 The AAO notes that EDGE indicates that primary, junior secondary and senior secondary school total 12 
years only. Students then take a compulsory senior certificate examination. The beneficiary received an 
examination exemption. 
Page 7 
or social studies. Accordingly, __ evaluation lacks credibility due to this material 
misrepresentation that he has ma~neficiary's prior coursework. 
evaiLlaL1UILS on s courses, the credit hours involved, the reputation of 
the beneficiary's school, and the structure of the South African educational system. He states that 
U.S. universities would accept this degree as a full bachelor's degree for admission to graduate 
programs, and he explains that the beneficiary had a rigorous post secondary school experience, 
resulting in his receipt of the matriculation exemption and exemption from having to take an exam 
prior to entering the university. 
states that EDGE is not the ultimate academic evaluation authority and that 
USeIS should consider relying on the opinions of the NAFSA Association of International 
Educators instead, which formed in 1948 and has approximately 10,000 international educators. 
Specifically, that NAFSA no rigid equivalency guidelines for 
admissions officers. In fact, uotes as providing: "Advice 
for admission officers' is intentionally not provided." As such, NAFSA does not issue peer 
reviewed placement recommendations or any placement recommendations at all. 
therefore, has not sufficiently explained why this publication is useful support for his equivalency 
conclusions. Furthermore, fails to provide copies of the relevant pages of the NAFSA 
material relating to South Africa. MatterofHo, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-592 (BIA 1988), states: 
It is incumbent on the petitioner to resolve any inconsistencies in the record by 
independent objective evidence, and attempts to explain or reconcile such 
inconsistencies, absent competent objective evidence pointing to where the truth, in 
fact, lies, will not suffice. 
This evaluator cannot resolve inconsistencies regarding the equivalency of the beneficiary's 
academic background without objective evidence resolving the inconsistency in the petitioner's 
favor. 
also asserts that U.S. universities accept South African three-year degrees for entry 
He provided website addresses from four U.S. universities to support his 
claim. By referencing these website addresses, _s effectively incorporated into the 
record of proceeding. Significantly, according to the websites, only two of the four universities 
explicitly allow South African three-year baccalaureate degrees for admission to a graduate program 
and one university expressly does not. 
The website for the 
states that the s of business 
administration program. See http://www .steru.nyu.edul AcademicPrograms/FullTime/ Admiss ions/ 
Applicationinstructions/Transcriptslindex.htm#2 (accessed July 15, 2011 and incorporated into the 
record of proceeding). 
The website for the Wharton School within the University of Pennsylvania states that the school 
accepts all three-year degrees for entry into its Master's of business administration program. See 
http://www . wharton. upenn.edu/mba/admiss ions/intemational-applicants.cfm#listA I (accessed J ul y 
15, 2011 and incorporated into the record of proceeding). 
The website for the Califomia State University Chico, however, actually requires a "4-year 
university degree comparable to a U.S. bachelor's degree" for admission to a Master's degree 
program. See http://www.csuchico.eduliss/prospective/qualifications.shtml (accessed July 15, 2011 
and incorporated into the record of proceeding). This information contradicts the statements that Dr. 
Bellehsen made regarding Califomia State University Chico's academic requirements for admission 
to its graduate programs. 
The website for the Office of Graduate Studies within the University of Califomia Davis does not 
mention South African degrees, although it does reference the British system. See 
http://gradstudies.ucdavis.eduiprospective/intcrnational.html(accessed July 15, 2011 and 
incorporated into the record of proceeding). Dr. Bellehsen stated in his first evaluation that the 
South African educational system is "closely analogous" to the British system. He asserts that a 
thirteen-year secondary education program is "common," but fails to provide any supporting 
documentation for that assertion. USCiS need not accept primarily conclusory assertions. 5 
Counsel also submitted two evaluation letters from~~~~~~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~ ••••••••• 
. the 
respectively. 
I (1988) published by as a reference but does not explain why AACRAO's more recent 
publications on foreign degrees, now in the form of EDGE, is not more persuasive. He also fails to 
provide copies of relevant pages from the handbook supporting his opinion. 
that the beneficiary completed the equivalent of 4.5 U.S. credits for each of 
~,~"~" classes and 30 U.S. credits for his one year of post secondary studies prior to 
starting at the university. that he bases his analysis on course hours and 
semester duration. He also reputation of the University of Pretoria's program, the 
number of years of the program, nature of the course th b f' grades, and the 
estimated number of hours the beneficiary spent studying. oncludes that the 
beneficiary completed the equivalent of 125 U.S. credits betw ry and university 
level study. 
The beneficiary's transcript only lists the courses that he took and whether or not he passed them. 
The course credit hours are not listed. More significantly, the record does not include the 
5 1756, Inc. v. The Attorney General of the United States, 745 F. Supp. 9, 15 (D.C. Dist. 1990). 
Page 9 
beneficiary's high school or other pre-university transcript that might support 
assertions regarding the 30 credit hours he assigns to the beneticiary's matric 
Moreover, the beneficiary's University of Pretoria transcript does not list any transfer credits. 
Counsel submitted an evaluation letter from 
that admission into one 
year of college level studies in the higher stream of upper secondary study, which was two years 
beyond 10th grade. He equates the higher stream courses to advance courses in the United 
States. The record, however, also contains a letter from 
states that the admission requirements for the beneficiary's program are on 
with matriculation exemption. _ notes that EDGE does not make the distinction between 
the higher and standard streams of upper secondary study in South Africa. He asserts that EDGE's 
analysis of the senior certificate is an analysis of an academic achievement lower than what the 
beneticiary actually completed. the beneficiary's post secondary studies and 
three-year Bachelor of Science degree to constitute a single source degree because the second course 
of study followed the first. At issue, however, is the equivalency of the beneficiary's ultimate 
degree, the three-year Bachelor of Science. 
The AAO tinds that the beneficiary possesses neither a four-year degree nor a degree from a shorter 
program that is equivalent to a bachelor of science because it builds upon a required level of 
prerequisite education. The petitioner has not established that the University of Pretoria requires one 
year of university level education prior to entry into its three-year bachelor of science in computer 
science program. The AAO notes that the petitioner submitted a letter from the University of 
Pretoria stating that a grade 12 certificate and matriculation exemption are the only academic 
requirements that are required for admission. There is no documentation within the record of 
proceeding, such as the beneficiary's high school or other pre-university transcript, to suggest that 
the matriculation exemption represents additional coursework beyond the 12th year of secondary 
education. The evaluators' attempts to combine undocumented pre-university education with the 
beneficiary's three-year Bachelor of Science degree are not persuasive. 
The AAO notes that none of the four evaluators have provided any peer reviewed source to support 
their opinions. Additionally, the evaluators each go about finding that the beneficiary possessed the 
equivalent to a U.S. Bachelor of Science degree with a dual major in computer science and 
mathematics in inconsistent ways. ~rovides a very general analysis of the 
University of Pretoria's bachelor of sc~ements, asserts that USCIS 
should use NAFSA opinions rather than those of EDGE, Professor A~eeks to assign 
credits to each of the courses that the beneficiary completed, and ~cuses on the 
beneficiary's receipt of the matriculation exemption and the fact that he studied within the higher 
stream of post secondary study in South Africa. 
USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions statements submitted as expert testimony. 
However, where an opinion is not in accord with other information or is in any way questionable, 
Page 10 
USCIS is not required to accept or may give less weight to that evidence. Matter of Caron 
International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r 1988); Matter of Sea, Inc., 19 I&N Dec. 817, 820 
(Comm'r 1988) . 
••••••••••••• ,oCUS upon the beneficiary's rigorous, higher stream post-secondary 
studies prior to beginning his Bachelor of Science coursework. As stated above, the petitioner has 
failed to submit any of the beneficiary's transcripts or diplomas from his high school or post­
secondary studies. The beneficiary's University of Pretoria transcript lists no transfer credits. Thus, 
the petitioner has not provided any substantive evidence regarding the beneficiary's higher stream 
post-secondary studies. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient 
for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Soffici, 22 I&N Dec. 
158, 165 (Comm'r 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg' I 
Comm'r 1972». 
also state that certain U.S. universities accept three-year bachelor's 
South Africa as being the equivalent of U.S. bachelor's degrees. As 
discussed above, not all of the websites support his assertion. Even if some 
universities accept South African three-year admission to graduate programs, the fact 
that certain U.S. universities may accept three-year foreign degrees for entry into a Master's degree 
program is not persuasive. Some of these universities may pose additional requirements. If three­
year degrees were equivalent to four-year degrees in the United States, then all U.S. universities 
would accept them unconditionally for entry into Master's programs. 
I 
•• - .. -. HI •• 't:-
ditionally equate the beneficiary's one year of pre-university study 
level transfer credits or Advanced Placement (AP) achievement in 
the United States. In this instance, though, the beneficiary's Bachelor of Science program was only 
three years in duration. Had it been normally a four-year program and had the beneficiary 
completed it in three years due to his previously received college level credits, then perhaps 
counsel's argument would be more persuasive. 
According to the letter from the Dean of the University of Pretoria's Bachelor of Science degree in 
computer science does not require one year of college credit for entry. This program is a three-year 
program, which was not accelerated for the beneficiary based on his previous educational credits nor 
was it predicated on the completion of a prior year of college level education. As stated above, the 
record lacks the beneficiary's high school or other pre-university transcript and the University of 
Pretoria transcript lists no transfer credits. Even if the beneficiary had entered this Bachelor of 
Science program with a year of college level education, such education would not have been 
required for entry into this three-year program. If the equivalency of this degree depends on earlier 
education not required for entry into the program, two individuals completing this Bachelor of 
Science degree program could possess two different degrees depending on what education they had 
when they entered the program. Following such logic, if an individual in the United States obtains 
an associate's degree and then a full four-year bachelor's degree, that individual would have 
something more than a bachelor's degree such as a Master's degree. That result is untenable. 
Rather, as in the case at hand, the final degree is the same for all graduates regardless of whether or 
not they came into the program with extra prior education. 
Because the beneficiary has neither (l) a U.S. degree above a baccalaureate or a foreign equivalent 
degree nor (2) a U.S. baccalaureate degree or foreign equivalent degree in computer science or 
information systems and five years of progressive experience in the specialty, he does not qualify for 
preference visa classification as an advanced degree professional under section 203(b )(2) of the Act. 
Qualifications for the Job Offered 
Relying in part on Madany, 696 F.2d at 1008, the U.S. Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth 
Circuit (Ninth Circuit) stated: 
[Ilt appears that the DOL is responsible only for determining the availability of 
suitable American workers for a job and the impact of alien employment upon the 
domestic labor market. It does not appear that the DOL's role extends to 
determining if the alien is qualified for the job for which he seeks sixth preference 
status. That determination appears to be delegated to the INS under section 204(b), 
8 V.S.c. § l1S4(b), as one of the determinations incident to the INS's decision 
whether the alien is entitled to sixth preference status. 
KR.K Irvine, Inc. v. Landon, 699 F.2d 1006, 1008 (9th Cir. 1983). The court relied on an amicus brief 
from DOL that stated the following: 
The labor certification made by the Secretary of Labor ... pursuant to section 
212(a)I(S)] of the ... [Act] ... is binding as to the findings of whether there are able, 
willing, qualified, and available United States workers for the job offered to the alien, 
and whether employment of the alien under the terms set by the employer would 
adversely affect the wages and working conditions of similarly employed United 
States workers. The labor certification in no way indicates that the alien offered the 
certified job opportunity is qualified (or not qualified) to perform the duties of that 
job. 
(Emphasis added.) Id. at 1009. The Ninth Circuit, citing KR.K Irvine, Inc., 699 F.2d at 1006, revisited 
this issue, stating: "The INS, therefore, may make a de novo determination of whether the alien is in 
fact qualified to fill the certified job offer." Tongatapu, 736 F. 2d at 1309. 
The key to determining the job qualifications is found on Form ETA-7S0 Part A. This section of the 
application for alien employment certification, "Offer of Employment," describes the terms and 
conditions of the job offered. It is important that the ETA-7S0 be read as a whole. The instructions 
for the Form ETA 7S0A, item 14, provide: 
Minimum Education, Training, and Experience Required to Perform the Job 
Duties. Do not duplicate the time requirements. For example, time required in 
training should not also be listed in education or experience. Indicate whether months 
or years are required. Do not include restrictive requirements which are not actual 
business necessities for performance on the job and which would limit consideration 
of otherwise qualified U.S. workers. 
Moreover, when determining whether a beneficiary is eligible for a preference immigrant visa, 
USeIS may not ignore a term of the alien employment certification, nor may it impose additional 
requirements. See Madany, 696 F.2d at 1015. USeIS must examine "the language of the labor 
certification job requirements" in order to determine what the job requires. [d. The only rational 
manner by which USeIS can be expected to interpret the meaning of terms used to describe the 
requirements of a job in an alien employment certification is to examine the certified job offer 
exactly as it is completed by the prospective employer. See Rosedale Linden Park Company v. 
Smith, 595 F. Supp. 829, 833 (D.D.C. 1984) (emphasis added). users's interpretation of the job's 
requirements, as stated on the alien employment certification must involve reading and applying the 
plain language of the alien employment certification application form. See id. at 834. users 
cannot and should not reasonably be expected to look beyond the plain language of the alien 
employment certification that DOL has formally issued or otherwise attempt to divine the 
employer's intentions through some sort of reverse engineering of the alien employment 
certification. 
Regarding the minimum level of education and experience required for the proffered position in this 
matter, Part A of the alien employment certification reflects the following requirements: 
Block 14: 
Education: 
Experience: 
Block 15: 
4-year bachelor's degree III computer sCIence or information 
systems 
5 years in the job offered or 5 years in the related occupations of 
project manager, infrastructure and capacity planner, 
programmer, or senior programmer 
Experience must involve IT plarming and operations support for 
telecommunications operations support systems; computer 
capacity and configuration for Unix systems; system 
configuration for HP, Sun, and Microsoft servers; and rT 
financial planning including hardware/software acquisition and 
parameters of overall cost of ownership models. 
thrpp_vP"r bachelor of science degree from the 
Prior to starting at the _liliiililililiii 
m3ltnculatlonexemptJon, which counsel asserts represents one year of study at 
For the reasons stated above, counsel's assertions are not persuasive. Thus, the 
beneficiary does not have the "4-year bachelor's degree" required for the job as specified on the 
alien employment certification. 
The beneficiary does not have a "United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree," 
and, thus, does not qualify for preference visa classification under section 203(b)(2) of the Act. In 
addition, the beneficiary does not meet the job requirements on the alien employment certification. 
For these reasons, considered both in sum and as separate grounds for denial, the petition may not be 
approved. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.s.c. § 1361. The petitioner has not met that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.