dismissed EB-2 Case: Ebusiness Consulting

identifyin,Q rhta deleted to 
prevent Ck;~ .. 'i ..... lwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy 
PUBtrcCOpy 
DATE: OFFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
NO'i Q 7 20" 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: _ 
PETITION: 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. § lO3.5. All motions must be 
submitted to the office that originally decided your case by filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, 
with a fee of $630. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § lO3.5(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, 
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 an ebusiness consulting firm. It seeks to employ the beneficiary permanently in the 
United States as an ebusiness and elearning project manager pursuant to section 203(b )(2) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.c. § 1153(b)(2). As required by statute, a Form 
ETA 750,1 Application for Alien Employment Certification, which the Department of Labor (DOL) 
approved, accompanied the petition. Upon reviewing the petition, the director determined that the 
beneficiary did not meet the specified job requirements or qualify for the classification sought. 
Specifically, the director determined that the beneficiary did not possess the requisite education or 
experience. 
On appeal, counsel submitted a brief, four educational evaluations, and additional evidence. The 
AAO sent the petitioner and counsel a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (NOID) on June 30, 2011 and 
afforded the petitioner 30 days to submit additional information to the AAO. As of this date, more 
than three months later, the AAO has received nothing further. For that reason alone, the matter may 
be denied as abandoned. 8 c.F.R. § 103.2(b)(13). That regulation permits U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) to deny a petition both for abandonment and on the record. For the 
reasons discussed below, the AAO concludes that the beneficiary did not possess the requisite 
education for the position before the priority date of September 3, 2002. 
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." [d. 
The beneficiary earned a foreign three-year Bachelor of Science degree in mathematics from the 
University of Calcutta in 2000, a post-graduate diploma (PGD) in operations management from 
Indira Ghandi National Open University (lGNOU) in 1998, and a Master of Business Administration 
(MBA) from IGNOU in 2000. The beneficiary additionally earned an honors diploma in systems 
management from the National Institute of Information Technology (NUT) in 1994. Thus, the issues 
are whether those credentials qualify the beneficiary for the classification sought and meet the 
specified job requirements. 
1 After March 28, 2005, the correct form to apply for alien employment certification is the Form 
ETA 9089. 
Page 3 
Eligibility for the Classification Sought 
As noted above, the DOL certified the ETA 750 in this matter. DOL determines 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 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. Rather, USCIS determines whether the alien is 
qualified under the alien employment certification requirements. Matter of Wing's Tea House, 16 
I&N Dec. 160 (Acting Reg'l Comm'r 1977); see also 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 generally requires four years of education. Matter of Shah, 17 
I&N Dec. 244 (Reg'!. 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: 
V is as 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] 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, 101st 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. 
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." 
-Page 4 
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 appeared in the Federal Register, the Immigration 
and Naturalization Service (the Service) (now USCIS), 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 experience 
in the specialty). More specifically, USCIS will not consider a three-year bachelor's degree as a 
"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 four-year 
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.P.R. § 204.5(k)(2). See also 
Regal International, Inc. v. Napolitano, No. 10 C 5347 (N.D. Ill. E. D. Sept. 29, 2011). 
For this classification, advanced degree professional, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B) 
requires the submission of an "official academic record showing that the alien has a United States 
baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree" (plus evidence of five years of progressive 
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 
experience in the specialty). For classification as a member of the professions, the regulation at 
8 C.P.R. § 204.5(l)(3)(ii)(C) requires the submission of "an official 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. Moreover, the commentary 
accompanying the proposed advanced degree professional regulation specifically states that a 
"baccalaureate means a bachelor's degree received from a college or university, or an equivalent 
degree." (Emphasis added.) 56 Fed. Reg. 30703, 30306 (July 5, 1991). Compare 8 C.P.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 record contains no evidence that NIIT is a college or university. 
The record also contains evaluations of the beneficiary's 
for Westwood 5, 
•
tober 4, for 
on October 6,2008, and for October 4,2008. 
These evaluations conclude s MBA degree from IGNOU is equivalent to a U.S. 
MBA degree. Both_and conclude that the beneficiary completed 120 credits 
of Science degree and an additional 40 credits for his Master of Science degree. 
assigns two credits to each Master of Science course that the beneficiary took. While 
that her process includes using unit credits or clock hours of instruction from academic 
records to determine the number of credits, the beneficiary's transcript in the record does not include 
either figure. 
Whil~ and _ indicate that they are members one or more of the following: the 
American Evaluation Association (AEA), the Association of International Educators (NAFSA) the 
European Association for International Education (EAIE) , the record does not indicate what 
requirements these organizations require for membership.5 The payment of dues does not confer any 
3 _ indicates he has a "doctorate in divinity" but does not identify the institution that issued 
h~ee. 
4_indicates that she has a master's degree from the Institute of Transpersonal Psychology 
and a doctorate from Ecole Superieure Robert de Sorbon, but does not indicate the field in which she 
obtained her doctorate. According to its webs 
awards degrees based upon past expenence 
5 The bylaws for the AEA, accessed on June 29, 2011 at 
"Any individual interested in the purposes of the Association . " The 
bylaws for NAFSA, downloaded from www.nafsa.org on June 29, 2011 do not provide any specific 
requirements for members in Article II other than the payment of dues. Voting members must be 
individuals working in educational institutions, training or research facilities, organizations involved 
Page 6 
expertise. _ also claims expertise as an educator. His brief biography at the end of his 
evaluation makes no mention of employment as a professor. 
USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions statements submitted as expert testimony. 
See Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r. 1988). However, USCIS is 
ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding an alien's eligibility for the 
benefit sought. Id. The submission of letters from experts supporting the petition is not presumptive 
evidence of eligibility; USCIS may evaluate the content of those letters as to whether they support 
the alien's eligibility. See id. at 795. USCIS may even give less weight to an opinion that is not 
corroborated, in accord with other information or is in any way questionable. Id. at 795; See also 
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'l Comm'r 1972)). 
Given the above inconsistencies, the AAO has reviewed the Electronic Database for Global 
Education (EDGE) created by the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions 
Officers (AACRAO). 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 more than 2,600 institutions and agencies in the United States and in 
over 40 countries around the world .. " See http://www.aacrao.org/About-AACRAO.aspx (accessed 
October 14, 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 
officials 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, EDGE is "a web-based resource for the evaluation of foreign 
educational credentials" that is continually updated and revised by staff and members of AACRAO. 
Dale E. Gough, Director of International Education Services, "AACRAO EDGE Login," 
http://aacraoedge.aacrao.org/ (accessed October 14, 2011 and incorporated into the record of 
proceeding). In Tisco 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 
with international education, or those employed independently. Finally, EAIE indicates that it offers 
individual membership to professionals working in or associated with the stimulation and facilitation 
of internationalization in higher education in Europe and beyond. See 
www.eaie.org/membership/policy.asp (accessed June 29, 2011). A review of the U.S. institutions in 
which EAIE currently has one or more members, which includes other credential evaluation 
companies such as World Education Services, does not list CCI. See 
www.eaie.org/membership/teaser.asp'?country=USA (accessed June 29,2011). 
-Page 7 
USCIS 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 USCIS was entitled to prefer the 
information in EDGE and did not abuse its discretion in reaching its conclusion. The court also 
noted that the alien employment certification itself required a degree and did not allow for the 
combination of education and experience. 
According to EDGE, a Bachelor of Science degree from India represents attainment of a level of 
education comparable to two to three years of university study in the United States. A master's 
degree awarded upon completion of two years of study beyond the two- or three-year bachelor's 
degree represents attainment of a level of education comparable to a bachelor's degree in the United 
States. 
EDGE also discusses postsecondary diplomas (PSDs), for which the entrance requirement is 
completion of secondary education, and PGDs, for which the entrance requirement is completion of 
a two- or three-year baccalaureate degree. EDGE provides that a PSD is comparable to one year of 
university study in the United States, but does not suggest that, if combined with a three-year degree, 
it may be deemed a foreign equivalent degree to a U.S. bachelor's degree. EDGE further states that 
a PGD following a three-year bachelor's degree "represents attainment of a level of education 
comparable to a bachelor's degree in the United States." However, the "Advice to Author Notes" 
section states: 
Postgraduate Diplomas should be issued by an accredited university or institution 
approved by the All-India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). Some students 
complete PGDs over two years on a part-time basis. When examining the 
Postgraduate Diploma, note the entrance requirement and be careful not to confuse 
the PGD awarded after the Higher Secondary Certificate with the PGD awarded after 
the three-year bachelor's degree. 
The AAO notes that the petitioner has failed to submit evidence showing that the beneficiary's PGD 
in operations management from IGNOU in 1998 or honors diploma in systems management from 
NUT in 1994 required a bachelor's degree prior to entry. 
Based on this juried opinion, the AAO must conclude that the beneficiary possesses the equivalent to 
a bachelor's degree in the United States. As the beneficiary earned a foreign equivalent to a 
bachelor's degree in 2000, he could not have acquired five years of post-baccalaureate progressive 
experience as of the priority date of September 3,2002. A petitioner must establish the elements for 
the approval of the petition at the time of filing. A petition may not be approved if the beneficiary 
was not qualified at the priority date, but expects to become eligible at a subsequent time. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.2(b)(1), (12); Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 49 (Comm'r 1971). 
On appeal, counsel asserts that the beneficiary possesses the equivalent to a U.S. advanced degree. 
Counsel submitted a copy of a prior AAO decision where the AAO determined that the beneficiary 
possessed an advanced degree based upon similar circumstances. While 8 c.F.R. § 103.3(c) provides 
Page 8 
that precedent decisions of USCIS are binding on all its employees in the administration of the Act, 
unpublished decisions are not similarly binding. Precedent decisions must be designated and published 
in bound volumes or as interim decisions. 8 C.F.R. § 103.9(a). 
Counsel additionally asserts that the educational equivalency evaluations that the petitioner submitted 
follow the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) guidelines, 
which are binding on member states and of which the United States is a member. UNESCO has six 
regional conventions on the recognition of qualifications, and one interregional convention. A 
UNESCO convention on the recognition of qualifications is a legal agreement between countries 
agreeing to recognize academic qualifications issued by other countries that have ratified the same 
agreement. While India has ratified one UNESCO convention on the recognition of qualifications (Asia 
and the Pacific), the United States has ratified none of the UNESCO conventions on the recognition of 
qualifications. In an effort to move toward a single universal convention, the UNESCO General 
Conference adopted a Recommendation on the Recognition of Studies and Qualifications in Higher 
Education in 1993. The United States was not a member of UNESCO between 1984 and 2002, and the 
Recommendation on the Recognition of Studies and Qualifications in Higher Education is not a binding 
legal agreement to recognize academic qualifications between UNESCO members. See 
http://www.unesco.org (accessed October 25,2011 and incorporated into the record of proceeding). 
The UNESCO recommendation relates to admission to graduate school and training programs and 
eligibility to practice in a profession. Nowhere does it suggest that a three-year degree must be deemed 
equivalent to a four-year degree for purposes of qualifying for inclusion in a class of individuals defined 
by statute and regulation as eligible for immigration benefits. More significantly, the recommendation 
does not define "comparable qualification." At the heart of this matter is whether the beneficiary's 
degree is, in fact, the foreign equivalent of a U.S. baccalaureate. The UNESCO recommendation does 
not address this issue. 
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: 
[I]t 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 U.S.C. § 1154(b), as one of the determinations incident to the INS's decision 
whether the alien is entitled to sixth preference status. 
K.R.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: 
Page 9 
The labor certification made by the Secretary of Labor ... pursuant to section 
212(a)[(5)] 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 rNS, 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. See also Matter of Wing's 
Tea House, 16 r&N Dec. at 160. 
The key to determining the job qualifications is found on Form ETA-750 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-750 be read as a whole. The instructions 
for the Form ETA 750A, 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, 
uscrs may not ignore a term of the alien employment certification, nor may it impose additional 
requirements. See Madany, 696 F.2d at 1015. uscrs must examine "the language of the labor 
certification job requirements" in order to determine what the job requires. Id. The only rational 
manner by which uscrs 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). uscrs'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. uscrs 
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: 
Page 10 
Block 14: 
Education: 
Experience: 
MBA or master's degree in operations management 
5 years in the job offered or five years in the related occupation 
of software design and development 
The beneficiary earned a foreign three-year Bachelor of Science degree in mathematics from the 
University of Calcutta in 2000, a post-graduate diploma (PGD) in operations management from 
Indira Ghandi National Open University (lGNOU) in 1998, and a Master of Business Administration 
(MBA) from IGNOU in 2000. The beneficiary additionally earned an honors diploma in systems 
management from the National Institute of Information Technology (NUT) in 1994. The AAO finds 
that the beneficiary possessed five years of experience in the related occupation of software design 
and development as of the September 3, 2002 priority date. 
The beneficiary does not, however, have a U.S. master's degree or a foreign equivalent degree. 
Thus, the beneficiary does not, however, 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. 
Due to the fact that the petitioner failed to respond to the AAO's June 30, 2011 NOID, the AAO will 
additionally dismiss the appeal for abandonment pursuant to 8 c.F.R. § 103.2(b)(13). 
The petition may not be approved for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an 
independent and alternative basis for denial. In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving 
eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 
U.S.c. § 1361. Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.