dismissed EB-3 Case: Business

MATTER OFF~-~ 
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE : SEPT . 24, 2019 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner , al !business, seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a business integrity 
specialist. It requests his classification as a skilled worker under the third-preference immigrant 
category. Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(3)(A)(i) , 8 U.S.C . § 
1153(b )(3)(A)(i). This category allows a U.S. business to sponsor a foreign national with at least two 
years of training or experience for lawful permanent resident status. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition , concluding that the record did not 
establish , as required , that the Beneficiary met the minimum educational requirements of the labor 
certification. Thus , he determined that the Beneficiary was not qualified for the offered position. 
On appeal , the Petitioner submits additional evidence and asserts that the Beneficiary is qualified for 
the offered position based on his three-year Indian bachelor's degree in a related field of study. 
Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. THE EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRATION PROCESS 
Employment-based immigration generally follows a three-step process. First , an employer obtains 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, the DOL 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. See section 212(a)(5)(A)(i)(I)-(11) of the 
Act. Second, the employer files 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 applies 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. 
1 The priority date of a petition is the date the DOL accepted the labor certification for processing , which in this case is 
January 17, 2018. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.S(d). 
MatterofF□ 
II. THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFERED POSITION 
In this case, the labor certification states the minimum requirements of the offered position of business 
integrity specialist as a U.S. bachelor's degree or a foreign equivalent degree in computer science, 
engineering, information systems, business, advertising, statistics, math, or a related field, plus 24 
months of experience in the job offered or in an analyst-related occupation. An alternate combination 
of education and experience is not acceptable. The labor certification also states, in pertinent part at 
Part H.14., that: 
Employer will accept a *Bachelor's degree in Computer Science, Engineering, 
Information Systems, Business, Advertising, Statistics, Math, or a related field, and 2 
years of work experience in job offered or in an Analyst-related occupation. *Employer 
will accept a 3 or 4 year Bachelor's degree. 
The Petitioner submitted an evaluation of the Beneficiary's education from .... I _____ __. 
Corporation, which concluded that the Beneficiary's three-year bachelor of science degree in 
hospitality and catering management from I I University of Health, Medical and 
Technological Sciences in India is equivalent to three years of studies toward a bachelor of science 
degree in hospitality management. The evaluation of the Beneficiary's education does not assert that 
the Beneficiary's three-year degree is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree, but instead concludes 
that the Beneficiary's degree equates to three years of U.S. college education. 
The Petitioner also submitted an evaluation of the Beneficiary's education from.__ ______ __. 
I I which compares the Beneficiary's courses in hospitality and catering management to courses 
that would be found in a U.S. business degree curriculum and concludes that the Beneficiary's 
"academic credentials are directly related to a degree in business." 
The Director determined that the Beneficiary does not have a degree that is related to one of the fields 
of study listed on the labor certification. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director ignored the 
I I evaluation. In his decision, the Director did not mention or analyze the I I 
evaluation, or indicate why the Beneficiary's courses in finance, accounting, statistics, management, 
human resources, information systems, and marketing were not related to courses in a U.S. business 
degree curriculum. Based on our review of the I I evaluation, the Beneficiary's degree, and 
his transcripts, we find that the Petitioner has established by a preponderance of the evidence that the 
Beneficiary's three-year foreign degree is related to a permitted field of study. We will therefore 
withdraw that portion of the Director's decision. However, for the reason set forth below, the petition 
cannot be approved. 
Based on language in Part H.14 of the labor certification, the Director also concluded that the 
Beneficiary does not meet the minimum requirements of the labor certification because Beneficiary 
has a three-year foreign degree that does not equate to a U.S. bachelor's degree. In assessing a job's 
requirements, we must examine the job offer portion of an accompanying labor certification to 
determine the minimum requirements of an offered position. We may neither ignore a term of the 
labor certification, nor impose additional requirements. See K.R.K. Irvine, Inc. v. Landon, 699 F.2d 
1006, 1009 (9th Cir. 1983); Madany v. Smith, 696 F.2d 1008, 1012-13 (D.C. Cir. 1983); Stewart Infra-
2 
MatterofFQ 
Red Commissary of Mass., Inc. v. Coomey, 661 F.2d 1, 3 (1st Cir. 1981). Our interpretation of the 
job's requirements must involve reading and applying the plain language of the labor certification. 
See Rosedale Linden Park Co. v. Smith, 595 F. Supp. 829, 834 (D.D.C. 1984). 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the plain language of the labor certification shows that the 
Petitioner would accept a candidate for the position with a three-year bachelor's degree, regardless of 
whether or not it is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree. We disagree with the Petitioner's assertion. 
The plain language of the labor certification indicates that the Petitioner will only accept a three- or 
four-year bachelor's degree that is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree. There is no indication on 
the labor certification that the Petitioner would accept a foreign degree that does not equate to a U.S. 
bachelor's degree, such as the three-year Indian degree held by the Beneficiary. 2 
We note that it is possible for a three-year foreign degree to equate to a U.S. bachelor's degree. In our 
experience, there are some three-year foreign bachelor's degrees that may be deemed equivalent to a 
U.S. bachelor's degree. For example, bachelor's degrees in the United Kingdom generally reflect 
three years of university studies. But, because U.K. university students typically complete a year or 
more of pre-university preparatory courses and examinations, we routinely find three-year, U.K. 
bachelor's degrees equivalent to U.S. bachelor's degrees. However, in this case, the Beneficiary's 
three-year Indian degree does not equate to a U.S. bachelor's degree. 
The Petitioner points to its recruitment which restates that the Petitioner "will accept a 3 or 4 year 
Bachelor's degree." However, this statement does not alert applicants that the Petitioner will accept a 
foreign degree that is equivalent to something other than a U.S. bachelor's degree, such as the three­
year Indian degree held by the Beneficiary. Instead, the recruitment supports our interpretation of the 
labor certification. We find that the plain language of the labor certification indicates that the 
Petitioner will only accept a three- or four-year bachelor's degree that is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's 
degree. Because the Beneficiary's degree is not equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree, he does not 
meet the educational requirements for the offered position. 
In sum, we find that the Beneficiary's degree is related to a permitted field of study. We will therefore 
withdraw that portion of the Director's decision. However, we find that the labor certification requires 
a three- or four-year bachelor's degree that is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree. The Beneficiary 
does not have the required degree and, therefore, he is not qualified for the offered job. We will 
therefore affirm that portion of the Director's decision. 
III. CONCLUSION 
In visa petition proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration 
benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. The Petitioner has not met that burden. 
2 We note that the Petitioner required a bachelor's degree in Part H.4. of the labor ceitification and did not allow for an 
alternate level of education. Thus, the labor certification requires a U.S. bachelor's degree or its foreign equivalent. If the 
Petitioner meant to accept something less than a U.S. bachelor's degree or its foreign equivalent, it could have indicated 
"other" on the labor certification and indicated the acceptable alternate level of education. 
3 
Matter of FLJ 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter oJFQID# 5962484 (AAO Sept. 24, 2019) 
4