remanded EB-2 Case: Computer Science

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF J-C-&C-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: MAY23,2017 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a commercial banking institution, seeks to employ the Beneficiary as an associate 
applications developer. It requests classification of the Beneficiary as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree under the second preference immigrant classification. See Immigration 
and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). This "EB-2" classification 
allows a U.S. employer to sponsor a professional with an advanced degree for lawful permanent 
resident status. A bachelor's degree alone does not qualify as an "advanced degree," but a 
bachelor's degree plus five years of post-baccalaureate progressive experience will suffice for EB-2 
classification purposes. 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition on multiple grounds. The Director 
found that, based on the issuance date of the Beneficiary's bachelor's degree diploma, the 
Beneficiary did not have either a bachelor's degree or five years of post-baccalaureate experience as 
of the petition's priority date, as required to establish that he possessed the equivalent of an 
advanced degree. The Director also found that the Beneficiary was ineligible for the benefit sought 
at the time the petition was filed. 
On appeal the Petitioner contends that the date of the Beneficiary's bachelor's degree should be 
considered March 2002, when he had completed his coursework and final examination and thereby 
fulfilled the requirements for the degree, not the later date when the diploma itself was issued. 
Upon de novo review, we will withdraw the Director's decision and remand the case for further 
consideration and the issuance of a new decision. 
I. LAW 
Employment-based immigration generally follows a three-step process. First, an employer must 
obtain an approved labor certification from the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). 1 See section 
212(a)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(5)(A)(i). By approving the labor certification DOL 
1 The date the labor certification is filed is the "priority date." A beneficiary must be eligible as of that date for the 
immigration benefit sought. 
.
Matter of J-C-&C-
certifies that there are insufficient U.S. workers who are able, willing, qualified, and available for the 
offered position and that employing a foreign national in the position will not adversely affect the 
wages and working conditions of domestic workers similarly employed. Second, the employer may 
file an immigrant visa petition with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). See 
section 204 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1154. Third, ifUSCIS approves the petition, the foreign national 
1;11ay apply for an immigrant visa abroad or, if eligible, adjustment of status in the United States. See 
section 245 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1255. 
For this advanced degree professional position, the labor certification must provide that the job 
requires an advanced degree or its equivalent. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)( 4)(i). In pertinent part, 
Department of Homeland Security regu'iations define the term "advanced degree" as: "[A ]ny United 
States academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of baccalaureate. 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." 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) (emphasis added). To be eligible for this EB-2 classification solely on the 
basis of a foreign degree equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree, a beneficiary must also possess five 
years of qualifying post-baccalaureate experience. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3). 
· II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner's Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, was accompanied by an ETA 
Form 9089, Application for Permanent Employment Certification (labor certification), which had 
been filed with the Depar_tment of Labor (DOL) and certified by the DOL. Section H of the labor 
certification specifies that the minimum educational requirement to qualify for the job of associate 
applications developer is a bachelor'$ degree in computer science, engineering, or a related technical 
field, or a foreign educational equivalent. In addition, five years of experience is required in the job 
offered or a related occupation. · 
The Beneficiary states on the labor certification that he possesses a bachelor of engineering degree in 
electrical and electronics engineering from in India. The record establishes 
that the bachelor of engineering degree is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree in one of the fields 
required by the labor certification. The Beneficiary's degree combined with five years of 
progressive post-baccalaureate experience, if established, would qualify him for EB-2 classification. 
At issue in this proceeding is when the Beneficiary received his "degree" from 
More specifically, the question is whether the "degree" dates from when the Beneficiary actually 
received the formal diploma, or earlier when he completed all of the requirements for the degree and 
received a provisional degree certificate. 
Several dates are critical to this case. The Beneficiary's priority date (when the labor certification 
was filed) is June 9, 2015. The Beneficiary completed the coursework and final examination for a 
bachelor of engineering degree in March 2002, and was issued a provisional degree certificate by 
(identified as an affiliate of ) on January 22, 
2005. However, the Beneficiary did not receive a formal diploma from until 
2 
Matter of J-C-&C-
March 18, 2016, which was after petition's priority date. The Director found that March 18, 2016, 
was the date of the Beneficiary's degree, and concluded that the Beneficiary had neither a bachelor's 
degree nor any qualifying post-baccalaureate experience as of the priority date, and was therefore 
ineligible for the requested classification. 
On appeal the Petitioner maintains that the Beneficiary had the requisite bachelor's degree and more 
than five years of post-baccalaureate experience before the priority date of June 9, 2015, if we 
recognize his "degree" as dating from March 2002, when all of the degree requirements were 
fulfilled. The Petitioner asserts that the Beneficiary's qualifying experience began on June 9, 2003, 
with his first "post-baccalaureate" job as a software engineer. Likewise, if the Beneficiary's degree 
were considered to date from January 22, 2005, the date of the provisional degree certificate, the 
qualifying post-baccalaureate experience allegedly completed by the Beneficiary would have 
exceeded five years before the priority date of June 9, 2015. 
The statute and regulations governing the EB-2 classification speak in terms of "degrees," not 
diplomas. So it is clear that we cannot limit our analysis to the date on which a university confers a 
formal diploma. Applicable EB-2 regulations reflect this distinction. For these EB-2 "bachelor plus 
five" petitions, the "initial evidence" rule requires submission of an "official academic record" 
showing the beneficiary has a foreign equivalent "degree." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B). An 
"official academic record" is not limited to a formal diploma.2 In fact, in the very next provision­
relating to EB-2 exceptional ability petitions - the initial evidence rule expressly distinguishes 
between degree and diploma: "[a]n official academic record showing that the alien has a degree, 
diploma, certificate, or similar award from a college, university, .... " 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A) 
(emphasis added). 3 
Accordingly, we must conduct a case-specific analysis to determine whether, at the time a 
provisional degree certificate is issued, the individual has completed all substantive requirements to 
earn the degree and the university has approved the degree. We must consider the individual nature 
of each university's or college's requirements for each program of study and each student's 
completion of those requirements. A petitioner will bear the burden to establish that a beneficiary's 
provisional degree certificate reflects that, at the time the certificate was issued, all of the substantive 
2 
See also USCIS Adjudicator's Field Manual, Appendix 22-1, Memorandum from Michael D. Cronin, Acting Associate 
Commissioner, USCIS HQ 70/6.2, Educational and Experience Requirements for Employment-Based Second Preference 
(EB-2) Immigrants (March 20, 2000), https://uscis.gov/ilink/docView/ AFM/HTMLI AFM/0-0-0- I /0-0-0-26573/0-0-0-
31 107.html (last visited April 28, 2017), ("Whether the alien beneficiary possesses the advanced degree should be 
demonstrated by evidence in the form of a transcript from the institution that granted the advanced degree. An 
adjudicator must similarly consider the baccalaureate transcript .... ") (emphasis added). 
3 
While this provision helps clarifY that the terms degree and diploma are not equivalent, we note generally that, in 
contrast to the advanced degree category, the EB-2 exceptional ability category is not grounded entirely in an academic 
award and thus its initial evidence rule is more expansive than that of the advanced degree category. 
3 
.
Matter of J-C-&C-
requirements for the degree were met and the degree was m fact approved by the responsible 
university body.4 
In this case the record contains the following documents pertaining to the Beneficiary's 'bachelor of 
engineering (B.E.) degree: 
1. Copies of the Beneficiary's statements of marks from in 
India, listing the courses taken by the Beneficiary in the 7th and 8th semesters of his B.E. 
program. 
2. A copy of the Bachelor of Engineering Provisional Degree Certificate from 
dated January 22, 2005. 
3. A copy of a Bachelor of Engineering degree certificate from dated 
March 18, 2016. 
4. A letter from the principal of dated March 19, 2016, 
certifying that the Beneficiary was a full-time student in the years 1995-2000 and that he 
"has successfully complet~d Bachelor of Engineering Degree (Electrical and Electronics 
Engineering) in the examination held during the month of March 2002 as prescribed by 
We cannot determine the date of the Beneficiary's bachelor's degree, or whether the provisional 
certificate is evidence that the Beneficiary completed all substantive requirements to earn the degree 
and the university has approved the degree, because the Petitioner has not documented or explained 
the relationship between (which issued the provisional 
certificate) and the (which issued the formal diploma). The only document 
that references a connection between the two institutions is the 2005 provisional degree certificate 
which contains a parenthetical phrase identifying as an 
affiliate of but close examination of the document shows that another 
university was originally listed on the document as the affiliated university. The record includes an 
excerpt from the "Official Website of Government of ' which lists the computer colleges 
in and identifies computer application activity as 
affiliated with The Beneficiary's degree, however, was in the field of 
electrical and electronics engineering, which is not identified on the website as a field of study for 
which has an affiliation with In fact, 
, in the field of electrical and electronics engineering, 
currently identified as the affiliated institution of See 
IS 
(last visited April 27, 2017). It is incumbent upon an applicant to resolve any 
4 
Along with any other proffered evidence, petitioners must also submit a copy of a beneficiary's statement of marks or 
transcript to demonstrate years of study, and coursework completed, along with a copy of the provisional certificate. See 
8 C.F.R § 204.5(k)(3) (requiring the submission of an official academic record as evidence of a beneficiary's possession 
of an advanced degree or equivalent of an advanced degree). 
4 
.
Matter of J-C-&C-
inconsistencies in the record by independent objective evidence. See Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 
582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). 
Furthermore, copies of the Beneficiary's statements of marks have been submitted for only two of 
the eight semesters in the B.E. program. The regulation at 8 C.P.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i) requires that an 
"official academic record" be submitted to show that the Beneficiary has the requisite degree for 
classification as an advanced degree professional. A complete academic record has not been 
furnished in this case, since the record lacks six semesters worth of the Beneficiary's statements of 
marks. In any further proceedings the missing statements of marks, or copies thereof, should be 
submitted. 
The record also does not establish that the Beneficiary has the experience claimed on the labor 
certification. The evidentiary requirements with respect to establishing the Beneficiary's qualifying 
experience are set forth in the regulation at 8 C.F .R. § 204.5(g)(l ), which provides as follows: 
Evidence relating to qualifying experience or training shall be in the form of letter(s) 
from current or former employer(s) or trainer(s) and shall include the name, address, 
and title of the writer, and a specific description of the duties performed by the alien 
or of the training received. 
/ 
While some of the letters in the record appear to meet the substantive requirements above, three do 
not. In particular, the letters from 
and are insufficient to establish that the Beneficiary gained the claimed qualifying 
experience with those three companies, as they do not provide a specific description of the duties 
performed. 
Furthermore, one of the jobs listed on the labor certification was with m 
Japan, from July 2007 to January 2009. While a letter from the Beneficiary's former 
manager who is no longer employed by the company verified the Beneficiary's employment with 
a letter from 
the current managing director and head of human resources 
verified that the Beneficiary was employed during the applicable time period by 
These two companies do not appear to be one and the same. As pr~viously 
stated, it is incumbent upon applicant to resolve any inconsistencies in the record by independent 
objective evidence. See Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. at 591-92. 
III. CONCLUSION 
Due to the evidentiary inconsistencies and deficiencies concerning the Beneficiary's academic 
recdrd and work experience, we will remand this case to the Director for further consideration. The 
DirectOr shall provide the Petitioner the opportunity to submit additional evidence on these 
and any 
other relevant issues before issuing a new decision. 
5 
Matter of J-C-&C-
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for further 
proceedings consistent with the foregoing opinion and for the entry of a new decision. 
Cite as Matter of J-C-&C-, ID# 81021 (AAO May 23, 2017) 
6