dismissed EB-3 Case: Accounting

.
MA 1TER OF P-T-&A-S- INC. 
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENT ER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE : MAR. 13,20 18 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner , a provider of tax preparation and accounting services , seeks to employ the 
Beneficiary as an accountant. It requests her classification as a professional under the third­
preference, immigrant category. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 
203(b)(3)(A)(ii), 8 U.S.C . § ll53(b)(3)(A)(ii). This employment-based, "EB-3" category allows a 
U.S. business to sponsor a foreign national with a bachelor's degree for lawful permanent resident 
status. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
Petitioner did not establish the Beneficiary 's possession of a U.S. bachelor's degree or a foreign 
equivalent degree as required for the offered position and the requested classification . 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and assetis that the Beneficiary's certificates 
from qualifies her for the position and the 
classification. · 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. THE EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRATION PROC ESS 
Employment-based immigration generally follows a three-step process. First , an employer seeking 
to permanently employ a foreign national in the United States must obtain U.S. Department of Labor 
(DOL) cetiification of the job opportunity . See section 212(a)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1182(a)(5)(A)(i). The DOL must determine whether the country has able , willing, qualified , and 
available workers for an offered position, and whether employment of a foreign national would hurt the 
wages and working conditions of U.S. workers with similar jobs. ld If the DOL certifies a position, 
an employer must next submit the certification with an immigrant visa petition to U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS). See section 204 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1154. If USCIS 
approves a petition, a foreign national may finally 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. § I 255. 
.
Maller of P-T-&A-S- Inc. 
II. THE REQUIRED EDUCATION 
As indicated above, for purposes of professional classification, a foreign national must have at least 
bachelor's degree. Section 203(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act. A bachelor ' s degree means " a United States 
baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(1)(3)(ii)(C). Evidence of a 
bachelor's degree must include ;;an official college or university record showing the date the 
baccalaureate degree was awarded and the area of concentration of study." !d. 
A petitioner must a·lso establish a beneficiary's possession, by a petition's priority date , of all DOL­
certified job requirements of an offered position. 1 Matter of Wing ·s Tea House , 16 I&N Dec. 158, 
160 (Acting Reg'l Comm'r 1977). In evaluating a beneficiary's qualifications , USCIS must 
examine the job otTer portion of an accompanying labor certification to determine the minimum 
requirements of an offered position. USCIS may neither ignore a certification term, nor impose 
additional requirements. See, e.g. Madany v. Smith .. 696 F.2d 1008, 1015 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (holding 
that the "DOL bears the authority tor setting the content of the labor certification") (emphasis in 
original) . 
Here, the accompanying labor certification states the mmtmum educational requirements of the 
offered position of accountant as a U.S. bachelor's degree or a foreign equivalent degree in 
accounting or business. 2 Instead of indicating "Associate's" degree or some "Other" educational 
credential, Part H.4 of the certification states a. minimum requirement of a "Bachelor' s" degree. In 
Part 1-1.9, the Petitioner also indicated its acceptance of a foreign degree equivalent to a U.S. 
baccalaureate degree. In Part H.8, the Petitioner stated that it would not accept an alternate 
combination of education and experience. 
The Beneficiary attested to her receipt, before the petition's priority date, of a bachelor ' s degree in 
business and accounting from The Petitioner submitted copie s of certificates in the 
Beneficiary's name , including f-inal examination and membership certificates. The record also 
contains copies of a diploma and marks statement s from an Indian university. The university 
materials indicate that, betore earning the certificates, the Beneficiary obtained a three-year 
bachelor of commerce degree. 
The Petitioner submitted two , independent evaluations of the Beneficiary's foreign educational 
credentials. One evaluation concludes that the Beneficiary's bachelor ' s degree equates to three years 
of U.S. university education , a':ld that her certificates equate to a U.S. bachelor's degree in 
business and accounting. The other evaluation describes her university and credentials 
t'ogether as equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree in accounting. 
1 This petition's priority date is December 15, 2016, the date the DOL received the accompanying labor certification 
application for processing. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(d) (explaining how to detennine a petition's priority date). 
2 The certification also states that the position requires at least three months of experience in the job offered. The 
Beneficiary's qualifying experience, however, is not at issue. 
2 
.
Maller of P-T-&A-S- Inc. 
The evaluations do not conclude, nor does the P etitioner assert, that the Benefici ary's thre e-year 
degree equates to a U.S. bachelor's degree . See Maller of S hah, 17 I&N Dec. 2 44, 245 ( Reg'l 
Comm 'r 1977) (finding t hat a U.S. baccala urea te degree u sually requ ires at least f ou r years o f 
colle ge or university education). Rather , the Petitioner contends that the Beneficiary's 
certifica tes are e quivalent to a U.S. bachel or's degree in a requir ed field o f study. Contrary to the 
requirem ents 
on the labor certifi cation and 8 C. F.R. § 204.5 (1)(3)(ii)(C), howev er, the reco rd doe s 
not establi sh the certifi cates as a "degre e" from a "college or university." 
On appeal, the Petition er notes that the Elect ronic Databa se for Global Education (EDGE) , an online 
resource that federal court s have found to be a reliable source o f fore ign ed ucation equivale ncies, 
considers cer:tificates of final examination and member ship to represe nt educ ation comparable 
to a U.S . bach elor 's degree. 3 The Petitioner asse rts: "This recogn ition is materially and signi ficantly 
relevant concerning discussion to demonstrate that it is not necessa ry that the benefi ciary should 
have a degree awarded by a college or university ." (emphasis in origin al). 
We agree that EDGE and o ther evidenc e of reco rd demon strate that the Benefi cia ry's 
credential represe nts a level of ed ucation comparable to that of a U.S. bachelor 's degree in a required 
tield. As discusse d abo ve, howe ver, the labo r certifica tion and the r egulati ons requir e the 
Benefici ary to have a "degree" issued by a "co llege or university." EDGE ' s opinion neither 
establi shes the certificate s as degrees, nor as a college or uni versity. ED GE ' s o pinion 
theref ore does not support the Beneficiary 's qualifica tions for the offered position or the requested 
clas sification. 
The Petiti oner also provides an expert opini on .stating that , contr ary to t he Director's decision 
is not merely "a profe ssion al industry associati on but a regul ator y body established b y [an] Act of 
the Parli ament of India." Based on "the uniqu e statutory positi on of " the Petiti oner asserts 
that the inst itute is a "deem ed university" and its certificates con stitu te a foreign degree equivalent to 
a U.S. bacca laureate. Contr ary to the Petition er's asse rtions , however, the act creating neither 
authori zes the institute t o issue degrees, nor d eems it to be a university. See The Chartered 
Account ants Act of 1949 (as amended) , 
http :/t 
(last vis ited Jan. 31, 20 18). The act auth orizes to otTer academic courses and exa ms, but 
also describes the institute as separate from Indian universities. See id. at Ch. III, 15A (authorizing 
universi ties to teach the same s ubjects covered by as long as their academic awards are n ot 
identic al or similar to the institute's). Moreo ver, Indian degrees may be granted only by universities, 
deemed universities, or instituti ons that Parli ame.nt specifi call y empowe rs to grant degree s. See The 
University G rants Comm ission Act of 1956 ( as a mend ed), C h. I V, 22, 
https ://wvvw.ugc.ac.in/oldpdf /ugc_act.pdf(la st v ~s ited Jan. 31 , 2018 ). The record does not estab lish 
3 EDGE was creat ed by the Amer ican Association of Co llegiate Registrars a nd Admissio ns Officer s. See, e.g .. Viraj. 
LLC v. U.S. All )' Gen., 578 Fed. Appx. 907, 9 10 ( li th Cir. 20 14) (describing EDG E as "a respec ted source of 
informa tion"). 
3 
.
Matter of P-T-&A-S- Inc. 
that is a college or univer sity or that is authorized under Indian law to issue degrees. 
Accordingly , is not an academ ic institu tion that can confe r an actua l degree with an ofticial 
college or university record. See Snapnames.com, Inc. v. Michael Chertoff, 2006 WL 3491005 * 11 
(D. Ore. Nov. 30, 2006) (finding USCIS was justified in concluding that membership was not a 
college or university "degree"). 4 
III. CONCLUSION 
Contrary to the requirements of the offered position and the requ ested classification, the reco~d does 
not establish the Beneficiary ' s possessio n of a U.S . bachelor's degree or a foreign equivalent degree 
from a college or university. We will therefore aftir m the. Director's decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Maller ofP-T- &A-S-Inc. , 10# 990740 (AAO Mar. 13, 2018) . . 
4 
The Petit ioner also su bmits copi es of four USC IS decisions. None of the decisions are precedential. The decisions 
therefore do not bind us in th is matter. See 8 C.F.R. § 103. 10(b) (stating that only precedent decisions bind USCIS 
officers in proceedings involving the same issue) .