dismissed EB-2 Case: It Consulting

1I.S. 1)epartnient of flon~eland Security 
U. S. Citi~cnship and Immigration Ser\~ces 
Q[fice ~/'~I~/III~II~.Y~I.~I~~~~cJ .~l/~pcrrl.s MS 2000 
Washington. DC 20520-2000 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
PT mr ,TC COPY 
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. fj 1 1 53(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
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. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish 
to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 
C.F.R. tj 103.5 for the specific requirements. 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 
$585. Any motion must be filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider 
or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: 
 The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, 
Nebraska Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. 
The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petitioner is an IT consulting company. It seeks to employ the beneficiary permanently in the 
United States as a senior software engineer pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. tj 1153(b)(2). The petition is accompanied by a Form ETA 9089, 
Application for Permanent Employment Certification, certified by the Department of Labor (DOL). 
Upon reviewing the petition, the director determined that the beneficiary did not satisfy the 
minimum level of education stated on the alien employment certification. The director specifically 
determined that the beneficiary's three-year Bachelor of Science degree in physics from University 
of Bombay (Mumbai) failed to establish that he possessed a baccalaureate degree in the relevant 
fields of study or a foreign equivalent.' 
On appeal, counsel submitted a brief and new evidence. 
The record shows that the appeal is properly filed and timely and makes a specific allegation of error 
in law or fact. The procedural history in this case is documented by the record and incorporated into 
the decision. Further elaboration of the procedural history will be made only as necessary. 
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." Id. 
The AAO maintains plenary power to review each appeal on a de novo basis. 5 U.S.C. tj 557(b) 
("On appeal from or review of the initial decision, the agency has all the powers which it would have 
in making the initial decision except as it may limit the issues on notice or by rule."); see also, Junka 
v. U.S. Dept. of Trnnsp., NTSB, 925 F.2d 1 147, 1 149 (9th Cir. 1991). The AAO's de novo authority 
has been long recognized by the federal courts. See, e.g. Dor v. INS, 891 F.2d 997, 1002 n. 9 (2d 
1 
 Although the director referenced the beneficiary's two years of study at NIIT, he did not provide 
any further analysis of this educational credential in his decision. The AAO will address the 
beneficiary's NIIT certificate further in these proceedings. The director also referred to 
"evaluations" and an article submitted to the record in his decision; however, the AAO only finds the 
WEE evaluation and no specific article relevant to the instant petition in the initial materials 
submitted with the 1-140 petition. 
Cir. 1989). 
 The AAO considers all pertinent evidence in the record, including new evidence 
properly submitted upon appeal.* 
The beneficiary3 possesses a foreign three-year bachelor's degree from the University of Mumbai 
and a GNIIT certificate for two years of study and one year of practical experience from the National 
Institute of Information Technology (NIIT). Thus, the issues are whether the beneficiary's three- 
year Bachelor's degree is the equivalent of a U.S. baccalaureate or whether the beneficiary's three 
year program of studies and his NIIT studies combined are the equivalent of a U.S. baccalaureate 
degree in the relevant fields of study as set forth on the labor certification.. 
Eligibility for the Classification Sought 
As noted above, the ETA Form 9089 in this matter is certified by DOL. 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. 5 656.1(a). 
It is sipificant that none of the above inquiries assigned to DOL, or the remaining regulations 
implementing these duties under 20 C.F.R. 5 656, 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 Woodcrcft Hawaii, Ltd. v. Feldman, 736 F. 2d 
1305, 1309 (9'h 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 
of Shah, 17 I&N Dec. 244 (Reg'l. Comm'r. 1977). This decision involved a petition filed under 
8 U.S.C. 5 1 153(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. $1 153(b)(2)(A), which provides: 
Visas shall be made available . . . to qualified immigrants who are rnembers of the 
professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent . . . . 
The submission of additional evidence on appeal is allowed by the instructions to the Form I-290B, which 
are incorporated into the regulations by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(a)(l). The record in the instant case 
provides no reason to preclude consideration of any of the documents newly submitted on appeal. See Matter 
of Soriano, 19 I&N Dec. 764 (BIA 1988). 
3 
 The record reflects that the petitioner submitted a subsequent 1-140 petition for the beneficiary 
under the skilled workerlprofessional classification that was approved on February 2, 2009. In the 
accompanying Form 9089, the minimum educational requirement was an Associate's degree. 
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, l0lS' Cong., 2"d 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. We 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). 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. 5 204.5 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 (1 990), 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. More specifically, a three-year bachelor's degree will 
not be considered to be the "foreign equivalent degree" to a United States baccalaureate degree. 
Mutter of Shah, 17 1&N Dec. at 245. Where the analysis of the beneficiary's credentials relies on 
Page 5 
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.""n 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. 
8 C.F.R. tj 204.5(k)(2). As explained in the preamble to the final rule, persons who claim to qualify 
for an immigrant visa by virtue of education or experience equating to a bachelor's degree may 
qualify for a visa pursuant to section 203(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act as a skilled worker with more than 
two years of training and experience. 56 Fed. Reg. at 60900. 
For this classification, advanced degree professional, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(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." For classification as a member of the 
professions, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(1)(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." We 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 fronz a college or university, or an 
equivalent degree." (Emphasis added.) 56 Fed. Reg. 30703, 30306 (July 5, 1991). CJ: 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(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, cliploma, cevtzficate or similar award from a 
college, university, school or other institution of learning relating to the area of exceptional ability"). 
While the beneficiary's three years of studies in physics are from the University of Mumbai, the 
record contains no evidence that NIIT is a college or university 
Because the beneficiary does not have a "United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent 
degree," the beneficiary does not qualify for preference visa classification under section 203(b)(2) of 
the Act as he does not have the minimum level of education required for the equivalent of an 
advanced degree. 
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 
"ompcrre 8 C.F.R. tj 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. 
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. 8 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. Iwirze, /PIC. v. Lanclon, 699 F.2d 1006, 1008 (9"' 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 
21 2(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 certzfication in no way indicates that the alien offered the 
certlfiedjob opportunity is qzlallfied (or not qunllJied) to perform the duties of that 
job. 
(Emphasis added.) Id. at 1009. The Ninth Circuit, citing K.R.K. Iwine, 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 ETA Form 9089 Part H. 
 This section of 
the application for alien labor certification, "Job Opportunity Information," describes the terms and 
conditions of the job offered. It is important that the ETA Form 9089 be read as a whole. 
Moreover, when determining whether a beneficiary is eligible for a preference immigrant visa, 
USCIS may not ignore a term of the labor certification, nor may it impose additional requirements. 
See Madany, 696 F.2d at 1015. USCIS 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 
USCIS can be expected to interpret the meaning of terms used to describe the requirements of a job 
in a labor 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). USCIS's interpretation of the job's requirements, as stated on the labor 
certification must involve reading and applying the plain language of the alien employment 
certification application form. See id. at 834. USCIS cannot and should not reasonably be expected 
to look beyond the plain language of the labor certification that DOL has formally issued or 
otherwise attempt to divine the employer's intentions through some sort of reverse engineering of 
the labor certification. 
On the ETA Form 9089, Part H, Items 4 and 5-A, the petitioner indicated that a Master's degree in 
Computer Studies or in the related fields of Science, Physics, or Engineering, with no further 
training was required for the job. At Part-H, items 8 and 9, the petitioner further indicated that a 
Page 7 
bachelor's degree or a foreign equivalent degree in the same fields with five years of work would 
also be acceptable. 
Initially, the petitioner submitted the beneficiary's diploma for a three-year integrated course for a 
Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Mumbai, Maharashtra, Bombay, India sin 1995, 
along with study transcripts for three years of studies from 1989 to 1995. The petitioner also 
submitted the beneficiary's GNIIT Award in Systems Management, from the National Institute of 
Information Technology (NIIT) awarded on September 5, 1997, copies of NIIT transcripts for 
Semesters I, 11 and I11 dated June 17, 1992; April 5, 1993, and March 29, 1994, respectively; along 
with the transcript for Semester S dated March 13, 1996.~ The petitioner also submitted copies of 
two Training Certificates issued through NIIT in 1997 and 2000,~ and a certificate of proficiency in 
Oracle DBA training for a one month course in 1999 issued by Concourse Information Technology 
International Limited, Mumbai, India. Finally the petitioner submitted a Certificate of Excellence 
signed b- that states the benefiEiary completed requirements to be recognized as a 
Microsoft Certified professional holding the certification of Product Specialist. 
The petitioner also submitted an educational evaluation dated June 29, 2004 from- 
, Worldwide Education Evaluators, Inc. (WEE), Atlanta, Georgia. Mr. 
states that the beneficiary's diploma from the University of Mumbai is a three-year program 
I equivalent to the completion of three years of study toward a four-year bachelor's degree in physics 
from a regionally accredited U.S. university, and that the beneficiary's NIIT diploma is a three year 
program of study with two years of classroom instruction and one year of professional practice in the 
field of computer science. states that the NIIT studies represent the completion of an 
additional two years of study in computer science from an accredited U.S. technical college and 
when combined with the beneficiary's university studies at the University of ~umbai, the 
beneficiary had the equivalent of a bachelor of science in physics and computer science from an 
accredited U.S. technical college.' 
On appeal, the petitioner submitted two exhibits. Exhibit One includes correspondence from various 
sources with regard to the equivalency of a three-year Indian bachelor's degree to a U.S. 
baccalaureate degree. These materials do not refer specifically to the beneficiary and his academic 
qualifications. Included in this exhibit is the following: 
5 
 Thus, the beneficiary appears to have undertaken his undergraduate studies and his NIIT studies 
concurrently. 
The course completed in 2000 is described as a Microsoft Certified Technical Education Center 
course in Implementing a Database on Microsoft SQL Server 7.0. The 1997 certificate was for a two 
week course in Developing Applications with Powerbuilder 5.0. 
7 
The director also referred to "evaluations" and an article submitted to the record in his decision; 
however, the AAO only finds the WEE evaluation and no specific article relevant to the instant 
petition in the initial materials submitted with the 1-140 petition. 
A two-page Credential Evaluation Report on World Education Services (WES) letterhead for 
an unidentified individual born in 1944. This document has a copyright mark for Career 
Consulting International at the bottom of the page. The document states that a three year 
Bachelor of Arts degree from India as equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree. There is no 
explanation on this document as to how the evaluator reached this equivalency; 
A three page document from Foreign Consultants, Inc. Northbrook Illinois, dated June 7, 
. - 
2005 a~rittcn by , examines the academic 
credentials of an unidentified beneficiary who completed a bachelor of science in computer 
science in India. examines the beneficiary's academic record for sixteen subjects 
in terms of U.S. credit hours and states the applicant had the equivalent of 128 semester credit 
hours. refers to a December 16, 1983 UNESCO document entitled "Regional 
Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees in Higher Education in 
Asia and the Pacific" as the basis for her equivalency statement; 
A letter written to 
 Career Consulting International, by - 
Education Consultants and Evaluators International (ECE International), Miami, 
Florida. 
 states the three-year degree from India is equivalent to a U.S. 
bachelor's degree, noting that the three-year degree from India requires at least as many 
contact hours as the U.S. bachelor's degree and is identical to either an accelerated three-year 
U.S. program or to a situation in which a student takes extra classes each semester and 
graduates in three years. also states that he bases his comments on a UNESCO 
treaty that is very "clear about functional equivalency maintaining that if a degree can be used 
for a purpose in one country, that [it] should apply in the U.S." also states that 
three-year degrees from Israel, Canada, the UK and other European countries via the Bologna 
process are routinely accepted as equivalent in the United States by universities and 
government agencies, while Indian three-year degrees meet with resistance; 
of a second letter to 
 dated March 11, 
B.E.S. Sant Gadge Maharaj College, Mumbai, India. 
"undoubtedly the three-year degree programs in India especially in Mumbai universities 
"exceed the 1800 contact hours on par with the contact hours required by U.S. universities for 
a bachelor's degree leading to a B.A., B.Com & B.Sc. Each credit represents 15 contact 
/classroom hours;" 
A statement from 
 The New College, Chennai, India. 
notes that an individual identified as a student of the Bachelor of Commerce 
course during the academic years 1987 to 1990 had to attend 180 lecture hours per subject, 
thus achieving 2700 hours for all the fifteen subjects during the period of time according to 
the norms of the University of Madras; and 
Copies of two letters from ~umbai, India dated June 25, 2006 and 
October 26, 2006. Both letters are addressed to In these letters, the writer 
identifies himself as a Professor of Physics at Mumbai University for five years who later 
Page 9 
worked for All India Radio. states in one letter that every three-year bachelor's 
degree program in India has more than 2000 contact hours with some having more than 3000 
hours, and that each Indian three-year bachelor's degree is equivalent to more than the 120 
credit hours required for a U.S. b&helor7s degree. He also states that in Indian universities, 
one examination mark represents between 1.2 and 2.0 clock hours of instruction with the 
majority representing between 1.2 and 1.5 clock hours. Based on this scale, m 
states that most Indian three-year bachelor's degrees represent between 120 and 135 credit 
hours. 
In the second exhibit, counsel submits the following documents: 
An excerpt from a Council of Graduate Schools (CGS) review article that states what the 
organization says in its Handbook with regard to applicants for graduate school standing that 
have three year degrees. The article also suggests Handbook wording changes with regard to 
this topic. The suggested wording states "Exceptions on standard accreditation nzny (emphasis 
in original) be granted for international applicants only, including applicants with three-year 
bachelor's degrees from European countries." 
A re~ort entitled "Findings From 2005 CGS International Graduate Admissions Survev 111: 
" 
~dmissions and Enrollment" written by - of Research and Pblicy 
Analysis. The report on its cover states that it contains a revised and enhanced section on the 
three-year degree, the Bologna Process, and U.S. graduate admissions; however, the excerpt 
found in the record does not reference three-year degrees, but rather talks about the increase 
in graduate school applications in the U.S. by foreign students; 
An Internet excerpt from the U.S. Department of State website dated November 6, 2006. 
This article is titled "U.S. Graduate Schools' Stance on European Three-Year Degrees 
Changing" with a subtitle "Survey says three-year European bachelor's degree increasingly 
'not an issue' for schools." 
A copy of a letter written by , dated May 17, 
2007. refers to an expert opinion letter prepared by Medgar 
Evers College of the City of New York. to whether NIIT has a 
system of accreditation or affiliation to notes that in 2002, NIIT 
established a post-secondary degree-granting affiliation with ITT Educational Services, Inc., 
in the United States. states that the academic reputation of ITT Educational 
Services, Inc. is deserving of the same consideration extended to a former wholly owned 
subsidiary, ITT Technical Institute. states that this group was founded in 1946 as 
Educational Services Inc. which presently maintains post-secondary accreditation in the 
United States by the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools.(ACICS). 
This expert opinion letter is not found in the record. 
 letter refers to another person, 
not to the beneficiary. Thus, - expert opinion does not refer to the beneficiary 
either. 
Based on the ITT Technical Institute's ongoing accreditation and NIIT's affiliation with ITT 
Educational service, asks that the advanced post-secondary program completed 
by an unidentified individual at NIIT be recognized with the same level of consideration 
afforded to all other accredited post-secondary U.S. institutions. 
This letter is accompanied by an Internet article from The Tribute, Chandigarh, India, that 
discusses the academic relationship between NITT and ITT Educational Services, Inc. The 
article states that the ITTIESI program will offer its four-year bachelor's degree in 
information technology with specialization in Information Systems Security (BSISS) to NIIT 
students in India. The article further states that the alliances between the two groups would 
allow NIIT's past, present and prospective students to transfer their DNIIT program credits 
and secure direct admission into the third year of the four-year U.S. accredited degree 
program; 
A Wikipedia excerpt on the ITT Technical Institute, identified as a private, for-profit technical 
institute located in over 30 states in the United States; 
A Wikipedia excerpt on the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools; and 
A compilation of information from the NIIT Academy website9 that examines advance 
standing available to NIIT career students through alliances with five universities outside of 
India. This excerpt notes that the amount of advance standing given to NIIT student varies 
between five universities and the universities reserve the right of deciding the extent of 
advance standing on a case to case basis. 
On appeal, counsel states that the issues are whether the education obtained by the beneficiary from 
the combined NIIT diploma with the three-year Bachelor of Science degree is equal to a four-year 
Bachelor of Science degree from a U.S. accredited institution and whether the three-year bachelor of 
Science degree from India is equivalent to a four-year U.S. bachelor of Science degree. Counsel 
asserts that both issues can be answered affirmatively in the instant petition based on the facts, 
expert opinion, and the global trend towards a common standard of education. Counsel notes that a 
qualified credential evaluator determined that the beneficiary had the U.S. equivalent of a Bachelor 
of Science degree in physics with a second major in computer science and that the petition's 
approval could be based on this evaluation. 
Counsel references Exhibit One and states that the reports for most of the major evaluation agencies 
reached the conclusion that a three-year degree from some countries including India would be the 
equivalent of a U.S. four-year degree. Counsel states that in fact a majority of U.S. universities do 
accept a three-year degree as equivalent to a U.S. four-year degree and refers to the CGS survey 
report. Counsel also refers to a report by - of the City University of New York 
9 
 See http://niitacadernv.net. (available as of October 2, 2009.) The website is for NIIT alumni, and 
explains ongoing alliances with universities outside of India that give academic credit for NIIT 
coursework. The website describes the NIIT program as a "non-degree" program. 
that examines the question of whether the NIIT education combined with a three year degree is 
equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree.'" 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions 
statements submitted as expert testimony. See Matter of Cclron Iizterncitionnl, 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; USClS may evaluate the content of 
those letters as to whether they support the alien's eligibility. See icl. 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. Icl. at 795; See also Matter of SofJici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm'r. 1998) (citing 
Matter of Treasure Craft ofCallfornin, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg'l. Comm'r. 1972)). 
The WEE evalaution does not state that the beneficiary's three-year degree is the equivalent of a 
U.S. four-year baccalaureate but rather the beneficiary's three years of studies is equivalent to the 
completion of three years of study toward a four-year bachelor's degree in physics. The evaluator 
uses the combination of the beneficiary's three years of university level studies with his GNIIT 
certificate to find that the beneficiary has the equivalent of a four-year U.S. bachelor of science in 
physics and computer sciences from an accredited technical college. Thus the only evaluation report 
in the record that directly pertains to the beneficiary does not state that the beneficiary's three year 
degree is the equivalent of a U.S. four-year baccalaureate degree. On appeal, counsel makes this 
assertion. 
On appeal, several letter writers refer to how credit hours are calculated in the Indian university 
system. The record fails to provide peer-reviewed material confirming that assigning credits by 
lecture hour is applicable to the Indian tertiary education system. For example, if the ratio of 
classroom and outside study in the Indian system is different than the U.S. system, which presumes 
two hours of individual study time for each classroom hour, applying the U.S. credit system to 
Indian classroom hours would be meaningless. -,, The University of Texas at 
Austin, "Assigning Undergraduate Transfer Credit: It's Only an Arithmetical Exercise" at 12, 
available at http://handouts.aacrao.org/ain07/finished/F0345p M Donahue.pdf, accessed October 2, 
2009 and incorporated into the record of proceedings, provides that the Indian system is not based on 
credits, but is exam based. Icl. at 11. Thus, transfer credits from India are derived from the number 
of exams. Ill. at 12. Specifically, this publication states that, in India, six exams at year's end 
multiplied by five equals 30 hours. Icl. 
The AAO finds the views of the other letterwriters submitted to the record on appeal to be irrelevant 
to the instant petition." First, the evaluations address the academic qualifications of other 
individuals. Second, while the letter writers describe varying amounts of credit or semester hours for 
lo 
The AAO does not find any such report although the letter from 
 Trustforte 
Corporation, refers to it. 
'' The other evaluation reports are also inconsistent with each other, and only provide support for a 
course by course analysis of university-level credit. 
three year Indian degrees, evaluation does not address the question of credit or semester 
hours for the beneficiary's three years of university-level studies. Thus the other evaluation reports 
while not addressing the beneficiary's academic studies also add no further clarification or support 
of the WEE evaluation. The AAO gives no weight to the additional evaluation reports submitted to 
the record on appeal, and will not discuss them further in these proceedings. 
We reviewed the Electronic Database for Global Education (EDGE) created by AACRAO. 
AACRAO, according to its website, is "a nonprofit, voluntary, professional association of more than 
10,000 higher education admissions and registration professionals who represent approximately 
2,500 institutions in more than 30 countries." AACRAO, http:/lwww.aacrao.org~aboi~t! (accessed 
September 29, 2009) (copy 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. 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 AA&O. - of 
International Education Services, "AACRAO EDGE Login," http://aacraoedge.aacrao.org!index.php 
(accessed September 29, 2009). 
In the section related to the Indian educational system, EDGE provides a great deal of information 
about the educational system in India, and while it confirms that a bachelor of science degree is 
awarded upon completion of two or three years of tertiary study beyond the Higher Secondary 
Certificate (or equivalent) and represents attainment of a level of education comparable to two to 
three years of university study in the United States, it does not suggest that a three-year degree from 
India may be deemed a foreign equivalent degree to a U.S. baccalaureate. 
EDGE discusses both Post Secondary Diplomas, for which the entrance requirement is completion 
of secondary education, and Post Graduate Diplomas, for which the entrance requirement is 
completion of a two- or three-year baccalaureate. EDGE provides that a Post Secondary Diploma is 
comparable to one year of university study in the United States but does not suggest that, if 
combined with a three-year degree, may be deemed a foreign equivalent degree to a U.S. 
baccalaureate. EDGE further asserts that a Postgraduate Diploma following a three-year bachelor's 
degree "represents attainment of a level of education comparable to a bachelor's degree in the 
United States." The "Advice to Author Notes," however, provides: 
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 conf~~se 
the PGD awarded after the Higher Secondary Certificate with the PGD awarded after 
the three-year bachelor's degree. 
We also reviewed PIER publications that do refer to the placement of Indian students in U.S. 
institutions. We note that a 1997 publication incorporates the first degree and education degree 
placements set forth in the 1986 publication. The P.I.E.R Worltl Eclzlcatio~i Series Iticlia: A Special 
Report on the Higher Education Sq~stenz and Guicle to the Acadelzzic Plnceme~it of Stticlerlts it1 
Ecllicc~tionnl Institutions in the United States at 43. As with EDGE, these publications represent 
conclusions vetted by a team of experts rather than the opinion of an individual. 
One of the PIER publications also reveals that a year-for-year analysis is an accurate way to evaluate 
Indian post-secondary education. 
 The 1986 A P.I.E.R. Workshop Report on South Asicl at I80 
explicitly states that "transfer credits should be considered on a year-by-year basis starting with post- 
Grade 12 year." The chart that follows states that 12 years of primary and secondary education 
followed by a three-year baccalaureate "may be considered for undergraduate admission with 
possible advanced standing up to three years (0-90 semester credits) to be determined through a 
course to course analysis." The AAO also notes that the CSF excerpt submitted to the record does 
not suggest that all three-year degrees would be accepted for entrance into graduate study in the 
United States, but only states that such credentials "may" be utilized. 
Moreover, we did not obtain an evaluation from EDGE or AACRAO and rely on that evaluation to 
the exclusion of the evaluation provided. Rather, we reviewed the placement recommendations 
published by AACRAO in various publications and on EDGE. Counsel also refers to a UNESCO 
convention that refers to foreign credentials being accepted by different countries, but does not 
submit this publication to the record.. UNESCO's more recent publication, "The Handbook on 
Diplomas, Degrees and Other Certificates in Higher Education in Asia and the Pacific" 82 (2d ed. 
2004) (accessed on February 26, 2009 at 
http://~inesdoc.unesco.org/iina~es/0013!001388/138853E.pdf) provides: 
Most of the universities and the institutions recognized by the UGC or by other 
authorized public agencies in India, are members of the Association of 
Commonwealth Universities. Besides, India is party to a few UNESCO conventions 
and there also exist a few bilateral agreements, protocols and conventions between 
India and a few countries on the recognition of degrees and diplomas awarded by the 
Indian universities. But many foreign universities adopt their own approach in finding 
out the equivalence of Indian degrees and diplomas and their recognition, just as 
Indian universities do in the case of foreign degrees and diplomas. The Association of 
Indian Universities plays an important role in this. There are no agreements that 
t~ecessarily bind India and other governments/universities to recognize, en masse, all 
the degrees/cliplomas of all the universities either on a mutual basis or on a 
multilnternl basis. Of late, many foreign universities and institutions are entering into 
the higher education arena in the country. Methods of recognition of such institutions 
and the courses offered by them are under serious consideration of the government of 
India. UGC, AICTE and AIU are developing criteria and mechanisms regarding the 
same. 
(Emphasis added.) 
The petitioner has not rebutted the AACRAO placement recommendations with published, peer- 
reviewed placement recommendations that reach a different conclusion or approach to evaluating 
Indian degrees specifically. 
We reiterate that A P.I.E.R. Workshop Report on South Asia at 180, explicitly states that "transfer 
credits should be considered on a year-by-year basis starting with post-Grade 12 year." The chart 
that follows states that 12 years of primary and secondary education followed by a three-year 
baccalaureate "may be considered for undergraduate admission with possible advanced standing up 
to three years (0-90 semester credits) to be determined through a course to course analysis." 
Nothing provided by the petitioner contradicts this information. 
The AAO also accessed NIIT's website to determine what type of educational services it provides. 
NIIT collaborates with India's government educational system from kindergarten through post-graduate 
levels. No admission requirements are posted on the website but it does reflect that it provides online 
courses to colleges and develops college graduates' technical skills to prime them for better employment 
positions. Thus, it appears that NIIT does not require a college degree in order to admit a student. In the 
instant matter, there is no evidence that the beneficiary's admission to NIIT was predicated upon the 
completion of a bachelor's degree program. In fact, some of the beneficiary's NIIT studies were 
undertaken concurrently with his studies for a three-year degree in Physics. 
According to a NIIT website," "the GNIIT program is designed to be pursued along with graduation. 
The minimum qualification for enrolment to this program is successful completion of Class XII." 
In the instant matter, the record does not indicate that the beneficiary completed the NIIT and GNIIT 
studies in an accelerated mode, but rather took the courses and practical experience over three years, 
concurrently at times with his post secondary studies. Thus, while the beneficiary may have 
undertaken additional coursework in a relevant field, the petitioner has not established that the 
beneficiary's further studies would constitute a fourth year of upper level baccalaureate studies, and 
thus warrant describing the beneficiary's three-year baccalaureate degree and additional studies at 
NIIT as the equivalent of a four-year baccalaureate degree in computer science, computer 
information systems, engineering or a related field. 
The AAO does not view the combination of the beneficiary's three-year program in physics with his 
GNIIT studies to be the equivalent of either a baccalaureate degree or evidence that the beneficiary 
possesses a master's degree in a relevant field. Further the AAO does not view the beneficiary's 
three year program in physics at the University of Mumbai as the equivalent of a four year U.S. 
baccalaureate degree in physics, one of the related fields listed on the Form ETA 9089. 
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 labor certification. For these 
12 
See http://Niit.corn/services/ITEducationfor Individuals/CareerCourses (in section on India). 
(Available as of October 2, 2009.) 
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. 5 1361. The petitioner has not met that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.