dismissed EB-3 Case: Healthcare Services

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 30. 2023 In Re: 28407187 
Motions on Administrative Appeals Office Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (Professional) 
The Petitioner, a provider of home healthcare services, seeks to permanently employ the Beneficiary 
as a health services manager. The company requests his classification under the employment-based, 
third-preference (EB-3) immigrant visa category as a professional. See Immigration and Nationality 
Act (the Act) section 203(b)(3)(A)(ii) , 8 U.S.C. § l 153(b)(3)(A)(ii). U.S. businesses may sponsor 
noncitizens for permanent residence in this category to work in jobs requiring at least bachelor 's 
degrees. Id. 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, and we dismissed the Petitioner ' s 
following appeal. See In Re: 25516556 (AAO Apr. 4, 2023). We affirmed the Director 's decision, 
concluding that - contrary to the requirements of the offered job and the requested immigrant visa 
category - the company did not demonstrate the Beneficiary's possession of a bachelor's degree. Id. 
The matter returns to us on the Petitioner's combined motions to reopen and reconsider. The company 
contends that, because a nonimmigrant visa regulation equates three years of employment experience 
to one year ofU.S. college or university , the Beneficiary has the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor 's degree. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating eligibility for the requested benefit by a 
preponderance of the evidence . Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). Upon 
review, we conclude that the Petitioner's motion to reopen does not comply with applicable 
requirements. Also, its motion to reconsider misapplies the nonimmigrant regulation to the company 's 
immigrant petition and does not establish the Beneficiary's educational qualifications for the offered 
job. We will therefore dismiss the motions. 
I. LAW 
A motion to reopen must state new facts, supported by documentary evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2). 
In contrast, a motion to reconsider must demonstrate that our prior decision misapplied law or U.S . 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) policy based on the record at the time of the decision. 
8 C .F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). We may grant motions that meet these requirements and demonstrate 
eligibility for the requested benefit. 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. Motion to Reopen 
The Petitioner's motion to reopen contains evidence already of record. Thus, contrary to 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.5(a)(2), the filing does not state new facts. We will therefore dismiss the motion. See 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.5(a)(4) (requiring USCIS to dismiss a motion that does not meet applicable requirements). 
B. Motion to Reconsider 
The Petitioner's motion to reconsider contends that the Beneficiary's experience equates to a U.S. 
bachelor's degree 
in business administration. The company therefore asserts his qualifications for the 
offered position and the requested immigrant visa category. 
1. The Requested Immigrant Visa Category 
A professional must have - and their offered position must require - at least a U.S. bachelor's degree 
or a foreign equivalent degree. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(1)(2), (3)(i). The Petitioner submitted evidence that 
the Beneficiary attended a Filipino university. But the documents contain inconsistencies and do not 
demonstrate his receipt of a degree. See Matter ofHo, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591 (BIA 1988) (requiring 
petitioners to resolve discrepancies with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth 
lies). The company also submitted an independent, professional evaluation of the Beneficiary's 
employment experience and letters from his former employers, documenting his work from August 
2005 to October 2017. The evaluation concludes that his experience equates to a U.S. baccalaureate 
in business administration. 
On motion, the Petitioner notes that the evaluation bases its conclusion on a regulation equating three 
years of employment experience to one year of U.S. college or university. See 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5). Thus, the company contends that the Beneficiary's 12-plus years of 
experience equate to at least four years of U.S. college/university, providing him with a U.S. 
baccalaureate equivalent. See Matter ofShah, 17 I&N Dec. 244, 245 (Reg'l Comm'r 1977) (finding 
that a U.S. baccalaureate usually requires four years of college or university studies). The Petitioner 
states: "For years, ... USCIS has held that three years of work experience are equivalent to one year 
of university education." 
As explained in our appellate decision, however, the regulation cited by the Petitioner applies only to 
H-lB nonimmigrant visa petitions. 1 See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D) (listing evidence that would 
demonstrate an H-lB beneficiary's possession of a U.S. bachelor's degree equivalency). There is no 
similar provision allowing experience - or even a combination of education and experience - to equate 
to a U.S. bachelor's degree for immigration as a professional. Rather, a professional must have "at 
least a United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(1)(2) 
(defining the term "professional"). Indeed, the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) 
received public complaints about the exclusion of baccalaureate equivalencies based on experience. 
1 H-lB nonimmigrant visas allow noncitizens to temporarily work in the United States in specialty occupations requiring 
at least baccalaureates or their equivalents as minimum entry criteria for the occupations. 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(i)(A)(l). 
2 
Final Rules for Employment-Based Immigrants, 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60900 (Nov. 29, 1991). When 
issuing the final rules, however, INS refused to amend the regulations to accept experience-based 
equivalencies. Id. INS stated: 
[B]oth the Act and its legislative history make clear that, in order to qualify as a 
professional under the third classification ... , an alien must have at least a bachelor's 
degree. Therefore, the Service believes that, to carry out Congress' intent, it must require 
a bachelor's degree ... and cannot permit an alien to meet this minimum requirement 
through experience alone .... Persons formerly qualifying for third preference by virtue 
of education and experience equating to a bachelor's degree will qualify for the third 
employment category as skilled workers with more than two years of training and 
expenence. 
Id. (referring to section 203(b )(3)(A)(i) of the Act). Thus, a professional must have at least a U.S. 
bachelor's degree or a foreign equivalent degree; a noncitizen cannot qualify as a professional based 
on equivalent experience alone or an equivalent combination of education and experience. 
The Petitioner's motion to reconsider misapplies the nonimmigrant visa regulation to the company's 
immigrant visa petition. The Petitioner therefore has not demonstrated the Beneficiary's educational 
qualifications for the requested immigrant visa category. 
2. The Offered Position 
A petitioner must also demonstrate a beneficiary's possession of all job requirements of an offered 
position as listed on an accompanying certification from the U.S. Department of Labor. Matter of 
Wing's Tea House, 16 I&N Dec. 158, 160 (Acting Reg'l Comm'r 1977). The Petitioner's labor 
certification states the minimum requirements of the offered position of health services manager as a 
U.S. baccalaureate or "a foreign educational equivalent" in commerce or accounting. The labor 
certification states that the job requires neither training nor experience. 
The Petitioner contends that the Beneficiary has the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor 's degree in business 
administration based solely on experience . But, as the labor certification states, the job requires a U.S. 
baccalaureate or "a foreign educational equivalent." (emphasis added). The Beneficiary's 
baccalaureate equivalency based on experience does not constitute "a foreign educational equivalent." 
Thus, the Petitioner's motion to reconsider also does not establish the Beneficiary's educational 
qualifications for the offered job. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The motion to reopen does not meet applicable requirements. The motion to reconsider does not 
demonstrate the Beneficiary's educational qualifications for the offered position or the requested 
immigrant visa category. 
3 
ORDER: The motion to reopen is dismissed. 
FURTHER ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed. 
4