dismissed EB-3 Case: Software Development

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 17931178 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Skilled Worker 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUL. 27, 2021 
The Petitioner, an operator of arts and crafts stores, seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a senior 
developer . The company requests his classification under the third-preference, immigrant visa catego.ry 
for skilled workers. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(bX3)(A)(i), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b)(3XA)(i). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
Petitioner did not demonstrate the Beneficiary's educational qualifications for the offered position. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of establishing eligibility for the requested benefit by a preponderance 
of evidence. See section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361 (discussing the burden of proof); see also 
MatterofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369,375 (AAO 2010) (discussing the standard of proof). Upon de 
nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRATION 
Immigration as a skilled worker generally follows a three-step process. First, a prospective employer 
must apply to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) for certification that: (1) there are insufficient U.S. 
workers able, willing, qualified , and available for an offered position; and (2) the employment of a 
noncitizen in the position will not harm wages and woi:king conditions of U.S. workers with similar jobs. 
See section 212(a)(5) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(5). 
Second, an employer must submit an approved labor 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. 
Among other things, USCIS determines whether a noncitizen beneficiary meets the requirements of a 
certified position and a requested immigrant visa category. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(1). 
Finally, if USCIS approves a petition, a designated noncitizen may 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. 
II. THE EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFERED POSITION 
A petitioner must demonstrate a beneficiary's possession of all DOL-certified, job requirements of an 
offered position by a petition's priority date. Matter a/Wing's Tea House, 16 I&N Dec. 158, 160 
(Acting Reg'l Comm'r 1977). This petition's priority date is December 2, 2019, the date DOL 
accepted the accompanying labor certification application for processing. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(d) 
( explaining how to determine a petition's priority date). 
When assessing a beneficiary's qualifications, USCIS must examine the job-offer portion of an 
accompanying labor certification to determine a position's minimum requirements. USCIS may 
neither ignore a certification term nor impose additional requirements. See, e.g., Madanyv. Smith, 
696 F.2d 1008, 1015 (D.C. Cir. l 983)(holding that "DOL bears the authority for setting the content 
of the labor ce1iification") ( emphasis in original). 
The accompanying labor certification states the minimum educational requirements of the offered 
position of senior developer as a U.S. bachelor's degree, or "a foreign educational equivalent," in 
management information systems (MIS), computer science, or a related field of study. The labor 
certification also states that the position requires five years of "related software development 
experience." 
On the labor certification, the Beneficiary attested that, by the petition's priority date, an Indian 
institute awarded him a bachelor's degree in MIS. The Petitioner submitted copies of a diploma and 
marks transcript from the institute, indicating the Beneficiary's receipt of a bachelor of science degree 
in "IT [information technology]." The transcript states his completion of six semesters - or three 
academic years - of studies. 
The Petitioner also submitted an independent, professional evaluation of the Beneficiary's degree. 
The evaluation finds the credential equivalent to three academic years of U.S. university studies. See 
Matter a/Shah, 17 I&N Dec. 244,245 (Reg'l Comm'r 1977) (finding that U.S. baccalaureate degrees 
usually require four years of university studies). The evaluation also concludes that, combined with 
three of the nearly nine years of employment experience the Beneficiary gained by the petition's 
priority date, his degree equates to a U.S. baccalaureate in MIS. 
The Director found that the Beneficiary's possession of the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree 
based on a combination of education and experience does not meet the position's minimum 
requirement of a U.S. baccalaureate or a single, foreign degree equating to one. As previously 
indicated, however, the labor certification does not specify the requirement of a U.S. baccalaureate or 
a foreign degree equivalent. Rather, the certification more broadly states the need for a U.S. 
baccalaureate or "a foreign educational equivalent." ( emphasis added). The requested immigrant visa 
category of skilled worker also does not require a degree. "Professionals" must "hold baccalaureate 
degrees." Section 203(b )(3)(A)(ii) of the Act. In contrast, a "skilled worker'' need only be able to 
perform "skilled labor ( requiring at least 2 years training or experience)." Section 203(b )(3 )(A)(i) of the 
Act. Thus, because the labor certification accompanies a skilled worker petition, the certification 
indicates that a foreign education equating to a U.S. baccalaureate may meet the position's minimum 
educational requirement even if lacking a single, equivalent degree. 
2 
Nevertheless, the Petitioner has not demonstrated the Beneficiary's possession of a U.S. bachelor 's 
degree or "a foreign educational equivalent." ( emphasis in original). The record does not establish 
the Beneficiary's possessionofthe equivalentofa U.S. baccalaureate without combining his education 
with employment experience. Thus , despite misinterpreting a portion of the educational requirement, 
the Director correctly concluded that the record does not demonstrate the Beneficiary's educational 
qualifications for the offered position. 
On appeal, the Petitioner argues that USCIS disregarded letters the company submitted from officials 
at two U.S. universities. The Petitioner asserts that, for graduate admission purposes , the universities 
accepted the Beneficiary's three-year bachelor's degree as the equivalent of a U.S. baccalaureate . 
A letter from one of the universities , however, suggests that the Beneficiary must complete additional 
coursework before gaining graduate admission to the school. The letter to him states that "your 
educational credentials should suffice for matriculation into our graduate programs, provided you 
complete any additional requirements required by the university for admission." ( emphasis added). 
The letter therefore does not demonstrate the university's acceptance of his degree as the equivalent 
of a U.S. baccalaureate. 
Also, the other university letter does not overcome the evaluation's contrary finding that the 
Beneficiary's degree equals less than a U.S. baccalaureate. The letter does not explain why the 
university disagrees with the evaluator's finding or how the Beneficiary's three years of foreign 
university education equate to four years of U.S. university studies. See Matter of Shah, 17 I&N Dec. 
at 245 (finding that U.S. baccalaureate degrees usually require four years of university studies). Thus, 
a preponderance of evidence does not demonstrate the Beneficiary's qualifying education for the 
offered position. 
The Petitioner also submitted copies of news articles about an increase in the number of three-year, 
baccalaureate programs in the United States. As the Petitioner noted , "the three-year U.S. programs 
concentrate studies within the shorter period of time." Butthe company has not demonstrated a similar 
concentration of studies in the three-year , baccalaureate program completed by the Beneficiary . Thus, 
the articles do not demonstrate the equivalency of his degree to a three-year U.S. bachelor's degree. 
In addition, the Petitioner argues that, because it requested the Beneficiary's classification as a skilled 
worker , USCIS should interpret the position's minimum educational requirements consistent with the 
company 's claimed intent to accept his combination of education and experience as the foreign 
equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree. The Petitioner cites a U.S. district court case finding that 
USCIS misinterpreted educational requirements like the ones here. See SnapNames , Inc. v. Chertoff, 
No. CV 06-65-MO , 2006 WL 3491005 (D. Or. Nov. 30, 2006). 
In SnapNames, USCIS interpreted requirements of a "B.S. or foreign equivalent" on a labor 
certification to mean a U.S. bachelor of science degree or a single, foreign degree equating to one. 
SnapNames, 2006 WL 3491005, at *2. The court, however, found that, in interpreting the 
requirements under the requested skilled worker category, USCIS improperly relied on regulations 
requiring a professional to have a U.S. baccalaureate or a single foreign degree equivalent. Id. at *8, 
referring to 8 C.F.R. § 204.5 (1)(2) ( defining the term "professional" as a noncitizen "who holds at least 
a United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree"). The court stated that "the 
3 
agency's interpretation of Snap Names' s educational requirement should be informed by SnapN ames's 
intent, to the extent possible, and not on the agency's understanding of similar but inapplicable 
regulatory language ." Id. at *8. 
SnapNames, however, does not bind us here. See Matter of K-S-, 20 I&N Dec. 715, 718 (BIA 1993) 
(noting that a U.S. district court decision is not precedential "even in the same district"). Moreover, 
the SnapNames court agreed with USCIS that SnapNames indicated its position's need for a U.S. 
bachelor's degree or a foreign equivalent based solely on education. Id. at **7-8. The court noted 
SnapNames's placement of the stated requirements "B.S. or foreign equivalent" under the section of 
the application form entitled "College Degree Required." Id. at *6. 1 The requirements also did not 
indicate acceptance of a baccalaureate equivalency based on other than an educational background. 
Id. Thus, the Snap Names court concluded that USCIS: 
has an independent role in determining whether the alien meets the labor certification 
requirements, and where the plain language of those requirements does not support 1he 
petitioner's asserted intent, the agency does not err in applying the requirements as 
written . 
Id. at *7. 
Like SnapNames, the Petitioner indicated its acceptance of a U.S. bachelor's degree or "a foreign 
educational equivalent." (emphasis added). The Petitioner's requirements also do not indicate 
acceptance of a baccalaureate equivalency based on other than education. Thus, as in SnapNames, the 
plain language of the Petitioner's labor certification bars a combination of education and experience 
from meeting the position's minimum educational requirements. Id. at *7. The Petitioner's request 
for skilled worker classification and the company's citation to SnapNames therefore do not establish 
the Beneficiary's qualifying education. 
Finally, the Petitioner's appeal includes a letter from a company vice president. Arguing that USCIS 
must defer to the Petitioner's intent when interpretingjob requirements of a skilled worker position, 
the letter states the company's intent to "accept any foreign academic credentials submitted as 
evidence of a bachelor's degree equivalent, as determined by an appropriate credentialing agency that 
specializes in the evaluation of foreign credentials." Thus, the company asserts that the evaluation it 
initially submitted demonstrates the Beneficiary's educational qualifications for the offered position. 
The Director's written request for additional evidence, however, notified the Petitioner of the need for 
additional proof of the Beneficiary's educational qualifications and afforded the company a reasonable 
opportunity to respond. We therefore decline to accept the Petitioner's additional evidence on appeal. 
See Matter of Soriano, 19 I&N Dec. 764, 766 (BIA 1988). 
Moreover, even if we considered the vice president's letter, it would not establish the Beneficiaty 's 
educational qualifications. The letter states the company's acceptance of "any foreign academic 
credentials" evaluated to equal a U.S. bachelor's degree. ( emphasis added) . The only foreign academic 
credentials of record are the Beneficiary's baccalaureate degree and transcript. But the evaluation 
1 Snap Names involved a nearlier application form for labor certification than thePetitionerused. 
4 
submitted by the Petitioner finds these documents equivalent to only three years of U.S. university 
studies, less than a U.S. bachelor's degree. See Matter of Shah, 17 I&N Dec. at 245. The evaluation 
finds the Beneficiary's possession of the equivalent of a U.S. baccalaureate based only on a 
combination of education and experience. The vice president's letter does not indicate the Petitioner's 
intent to accept non-academic credentials like employment experience as proofof a U.S. baccalaureate 
equivalency. The letter therefore would not establish the Beneficiary's educational qualifications for 
the offered position. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated the Beneficiary's possession of the minimum educational 
requirements of the offered position. We will therefore affam the petition's denial. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5