dismissed H-1B Case: Accounting

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 7261867 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : JAN. 29, 2020 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary under the H-lB nonimmigrant 
classification for specialty occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 
101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) , 8 U.S .C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). The H-lB program allows a U.S. employer to 
temporarily employ a qualified foreign worker in a position that requires both: (a) the theoretical and 
practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge ; and (b) the attainment of a bachelor's 
or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent) as a minimum prerequisite for entry into 
the position . 
The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition , concluding that the evidence of 
record did not establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation . On appeal, the 
Petitioner provides a brief and additional evidence , and asserts that the Director erred in denying the 
petition. 
In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review , we will dismiss the appeal. 1 
I. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION 
We will first discuss whether the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
A. Legal Framework 
Section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1184(i)(l) , defines the term "specialty occupation " as an 
occupation that requires : 
(A) theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge , 
and 
(B) attainment of a bachelor 's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its 
equivalent) as a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) largely restates this statutory definition , but adds a 
non-exhaustive list of fields of endeavor. In addition , the regulations provide that the proffered 
position must meet one of the following criteria to qualify as a specialty occupation: 
1 We follow the preponderance of the evidence standard. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). 
(]) A baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry into the particular position; 
(2) The degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among 
similar organizations or, in the alternative, an employer may show that its 
particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an 
individual with a degree; 
(3) The employer normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the position; or 
( 4) The nature of the specific duties [is] so specialized and complex that knowledge 
required to perform the duties is usually associated with the attainment of a 
baccalaureate or higher degree. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). We construe the term "degree" to mean not just any baccalaureate or 
higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proposed position. See Royal 
Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d 139, 147 (1st Cir. 2007) (describing "a degree requirement in a 
specific specialty" as "one that relates directly to the duties and responsibilities of a particular 
position"). 
I. PROFFERED POSITION 
The Petitioner intends to employ the Beneficiary on a full-time basis as a "staff accountant" for the 
duration of the validity period requested. The Petitioner initially indicated the Beneficiary will 
analyze financial information and prepare financial reports to determine or maintain record of assets, 
liabilities, profit and loss, tax liability, and other financial activities within our organization. 2 It 
provided a set of job functions consisting of five items with the relative percentage of time the 
Beneficiary will devote to each job function when it filed the petition, as follows (verbatim): 
1. Annual Report to U.S. Internal Revenue Service. (30%) 
Serve as the I I in-house accountant responsible for the 
preparation of the IRS annual report. Work with an independent local 
accounting firm to meet the necessary requirements to prepare and file the IRS 
annual report. Meet with local firm accountants and review their work to insure 
accuracy of tax-exempt reporting. Ensure maintenance of tax-exempt status. 
2. Tracking of Daily Finances [for the Petitioner]. (25%) 
Process and track budgeted expenses and daily transaction. Review budgets 
and audit expenditures to preserve tax-exempt status. Work with administration 
on budgetary controls. 
2 This description of the duties of the position is a direct quote from the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) 
summary report for "Accountants." https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/13-201 l .Ol (last visited Jan.28.2020). 
2 
3. Monthly Financial Report to Ministry of Education inl I (20%).-------, 
Prepare monthly financial reports according to the requirements of the I~-~ 
Ministry of Education. 
4. Quarterly Financial Report to [affiliate university in the United States]. (15%) 
Prepare monthly reports to [ affiliate university in the United States] pursuant to 
dual-degree agreement requirements. 
5. Weekly Financial Report to [affiliate university inl ~- (10%) 
Prepare and submit weekly financial requirements to the accountant counterpart 
in [the affiliate university inl ~-
The Petitioner's initial letter submitted in support of the petition that the minimum requirements for 
the position is a bachelor's degree in business administration with a major in accounting. In other 
material, the Petitioner specified that a bachelor's degree with a major in accounting was needed for 
entry into the position. 
II. ANALYSIS 
Upon review of the record in its totality and for the reasons set out below, we determine that the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
Specifically, the record does not establish that the job duties require an educational background, or its 
equivalent, commensurate with a specialty occupation. 3 
The Director concluded the evidence was insufficient to establish that the position qualified as a 
specialty occupation under at least one of the criteria in 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). On appeal, the 
Petitioner discusses the position's qualification as a specialty occupation solely under the criteria in 8 
C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l) and (2). It does not provide new documentary evidence, or otherwise 
challenge the Director's determination of ineligibility, under the criteria in subsections (3) or ( 4) of 8 
C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). Therefore, we will focus our discussion on whether the position qualifies 
as a specialty occupation under the criterion in 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l) and (2). 
A. First Criterion 
We tum first to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l), which requires that a baccalaureate 
or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for 
entry into the particular position. To inform this inquiry, we generally recognize the U.S. Department 
of Labor's (DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) as an authoritative source on the 
duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses. 4 
3 The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H- IB petition, including evidence regarding the proffered position 
and its business operations. While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and considered each 
one. 
4 We do not, however, maintain that the Handbook is the exclusive source of relevant information. To satisty the first 
criterion, the Petitioner bears the burden to submit sufficient evidence to support a determination that its particular 
position will normally have at its minimum, a bachelor's degree requirement in a particular specialty, or its equivalent, 
3 
On the labor condition application (LCA)5 submitted in support of the H-lB petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the occupational category "Accountants and Auditors" 
corresponding to the Standard Occupational Classification code 13-2011.6 We reviewed the chapter 
of the Handbook entitled "Accountants and Auditors," including the sections regarding the typical 
duties and requirements for this occupational category. However, the Handbook does not indicate that 
"Accountants and Auditors" comprise an occupational group for which at least a bachelor's degree in 
a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the 
occupation. 
While the Petitioner identified some portions of the Handbook that appeared favorable to its eligibility 
claims under this criterion, the portion of the Handbook titled "How to Become an Accountant or 
Auditor" also states in part: "In some cases, those with associate's degrees, as well as bookkeepers 
and accounting clerks who meet the education and experience requirements set by their employers, 
get junior accounting positions and advance to accountant positions by showing their accounting skills 
on the job." Accordingly, individuals who have less than a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, 
or its equivalent, can obtain junior accounting positions and advance to accountant 
positions. Furthermore, the Handbook does not indicate that the education and experience 
requirements set by the employers must be the equivalent to at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty. Thus, the Handbook does not support the claim that the occupational category of 
accountants is one for which normally the minimum requirement for entry is a baccalaureate degree 
( or higher) in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
The Petitioner also referenced the Occupational Information Network ( O*NET) to indicate the 
proffered position is a specialty occupation. O*NET states that most accountant occupations require 
a four-year bachelor's degree, and this occupation falls in the Job Zone Four which requires 
considerable preparation needed. However, O*NET OnLine is insufficient to establish that the 
proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. In fact, O*NET does not state a requirement for 
a bachelor's degree. Specifically, it assigns this occupation a Job Zone "Four" rating, which groups 
it among occupations of which "most," but not all, "require a four-year bachelor's degree." Further, 
O*NET does not indicate that four-year bachelor's degrees required by Job Zone Four occupations 
must be in a specific specialty directly related to the occupation. Therefore, O*NET information is 
not probative evidence to establish that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. Also, the 
for entry at any level - be it at the entry level (Level I), or at the fully competent level (Level TV). The Handbook may 
be accessed at the Internet site http://www.bls.gov/ooh/. 
5 A petitioner submits the LCA to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) to demonstrate that it will pay an H-lB worker 
the higher of either the prevailing wage for the occupational classification in the area of employment or the actual wage 
paid by the employer to other employees with similar duties, experience, and qualifications. Section 2 l 2(n)(l) of the 
Act; 20 C.F.R. § 655.731(a). 
6 The Petitioner classified the proffered position at a Level II wage. We will consider this selection in our analysis of the 
position. The "Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance" issued by the DOL provides a description of the wage 
levels. DO L's wage-level guidance specifies that a Level II designation is reserved for positions involving only moderately 
complex tasks requiring limited judgment. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage 
Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http: //fl cdatacen ter. com/ down I oad/NPWH C _Guidance_ Revised_ I I_ 2009. pd f A prevai Ii ng wage determination starts 
with an entry level wage and progresses to a higher wage level after considering the experience, education, and skill 
requirements of the Petitioner's job opportunity. Id. 
4 
report does not distinguish the respondents' positions by career level ( e.g., entry-level, mid-level, 
senior-level) or other relevant aspects. We also note that the summary report provides the educational 
requirements of "respondents," but does not account for 100% of the "respondents." Finally, the graph 
in the summary report does not indicate that the "education level" for the respondents must be in a 
specific specialty. 7 
The occupation's Specialized Vocational Preparation (SVP) rating of 7 < 8 is even less persuasive. 
An SVP rating of 7 to less than ("<") 8 indicates that the occupation requires "over 2 years up to and 
including 4 years" of training." While the SVP rating indicates the total number of years of vocational 
preparation required for a particular position, it is important to note that it does not describe how those 
years are to be divided among training, experience, and formal education which, by definition, includes 
high school education and commercial or shop training. 8 The SVP rating also does not specify the 
particular type of degree, if any, that a position would require, nor does it indicate that such a degree 
would be in a specific specialty. Further, the SVP rating does not distinguish the respondents' 
positions by career level (e.g., entry-level, mid-level, senior-level) or other relevant aspects. For all 
of these reasons, we are not persuaded by the Petitioner's citations to O*NET. 
On appeal, the Petitioner also references various articles and reports from sources such as the 
Association of International Certified Public Accountants, "regarding trends in the supply of 
accounting graduates and the demand for public accountants," for the proposition that "[g]iven [the] 
extremely high number of annual college graduates with bachelor's degrees in accounting, it cannot 
be reasonably argued that a bachelor's degree in accounting is not a normal entry-level requirement 
for the position of staff accountant." The Petitioner also discusses a 2013 U.S. Bureau of Labor 
Statistics Report,9 which forecasts, among other things, that there will be 452,100 job openings within 
the "Accountants and Auditors" occupation. This report concludes "[i]n many of these occupations, 
college graduates typically can qualify for - and be competent in - entry-level jobs with a bachelor's 
degree and no additional on-the-job training or work experience." 
Here, the Petitioner confuses the ability of a degreed accountant person to qualify for - and be 
competent in - performing the duties of the proffered position with a degree requirement in order to 
perform the duties. While the Petitioner may draw inferences that certain business or accounting 
related courses may be beneficial in performing various duties of the position, we disagree with its 
inference that such a degree is required in order to perform the duties of the proffered position. Put 
simply, stating that a person with a bachelor's degree could perform the duties of the proffered position 
is not the same as stating that a degree in a specific specialty is required to perform those duties. As 
such, the Petitioner's analysis misconstrues the statutory and regulatory requirements of a specialty 
occupation. 
7 For example, on appeal the Petitioner highlights an example provided by O*NET regarding Job Zone Four occupation 
which suggests that "an accountant must complete four years of college." However, O*NET does not specify the type of 
degree required for an accountant, e.g. a degree in a specific specialty. Rather, as discussed, O*NET states "most of the 
occupations [under Job Zone Four] require a four-year bachelor's degree, but some do not. ... Employees in these 
occupations usually need several years of work-related experience, on-the-job training, and/or vocational training. For 
additional information. see the O*NET Online help webpage available at https://www.onetonline.org/help/online/zones. 
8 This training may be acquired in a school, work, military, institutional, or vocational environment. Specific vocational 
training includes: vocational education, apprenticeship training, in-plant training, on-the-job training. and essential 
experience in other jobs. See the O*NET Online Help webpage available at http://www.onetonline.org/help/online/svp. 
9 The Petitioner provided the front cover, and pages 33, 36, and 37 of this report. 
5 
The Petitioner has not provided documentation from a probative source to substantiate its assertion 
regarding the minimum requirement for entry into this particular position. Therefore, it has not 
satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). 
B. Second Criterion 
The second criterion presents two, alternative prongs: "The degree requirement is common to the 
industry in parallel positions among similar organizations or, in the alternative, an employer may show 
that its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with 
a degree .... " 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong concentrates on 
the common industry practice, while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the Petitioner's specific 
position. 
1. First Prong 
To satisfy this first prong of the second criterion, the Petitioner must establish that the "degree 
requirement" (i.e., a requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent) is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. 
We generally consider the following sources of evidence to determine if there is such a common degree 
requirement: whether the Handbook reports that the industry requires a degree; whether the industry's 
professional association has made a degree a minimum entry requirement; and whether letters or 
affidavits from firms or individuals in the industry establish that such firms "routinely employ and 
recruit only degreed individuals." See Shanti, Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151, 1165 (D. Minn. 1999) 
(quoting Hird/Blaker Corp. v. Sava, 712 F. Supp. 1095, 1102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989) (considering these 
"factors" to inform the commonality of a degree requirement)). 
As previously discussed, the Handbook does not establish that a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty is a common requirement within the industry for parallel positions among similar 
organizations. Thus, we incorporate by reference the previous discussion on the matter. In addition, 
there are no submissions from the industry's professional association indicating that it has made a 
degree a minimum entry requirement. 
In support of this criterion, the Petitioner submitted copies of job announcements placed by other 
employers. However, upon review of the documents, we find that the Petitioner's reliance on the job 
announcements is misplaced. First, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that these organizations are 
similar. When determining whether the Petitioner and the advertising organization share the same 
general characteristics, we look at the information regarding the nature or type of organization, and, 
when pertinent, the particular scope of operations, as well as the level of revenue and staffing (to list 
just a few elements that may be considered). It is not sufficient for the Petitioner to claim that an 
organization is similar and in the same industry without providing a legitimate basis for such an 
assertion. 
6 
Here, the Petitioner is an accredited institution of higher learning that was established in 2013, with a 
staff of nine employees, which offers degree programs to post-secondary students through a joint 
agreement with S-, a university whir provil es facilities for the Petitioner on its campus. It is also 
affiliated with a university located in The Petitioner provided printouts of some pages from 
its website which state "[ s Jome potential joint programs are under development, with a Master of Arts 
in teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language as the first to be launched." On appeal, the Petitioner notes 
that "[the United States-based] operation is small but that is not a relevant consideration." We 
disagree. 
Here, the Petitioner has submitted job announcements from institutions of higher learning in the United 
States, and has included material in some instances to establish that these employers offer a wide array 
of degree programs to thousands of enrolled students each year. In contrast, the Petitioner has not 
substantiated the specific degree programs that it offers to students, other than the previously discussed 
internet material which notes that potential degree programs are "under development." Additionally, 
while the Petitioner claims to employs nine individuals, it has not provided evidence regarding the 
number of students that are actively enrolled within its degree programs. Therefore, we cannot 
conclude based on the record that these large institutions of higher learning are similar to the Petitioner. 
The Petitioner has submitted job announcements from other employers who appear based on their 
organization titles to be engaged in the provision of higher education services without documenting 
their general characteristics such that we can determine whether they are similar organizations to the 
Petitioner. The Petitioner has the burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter ofSkirball Cultural Ctr., 25 I&N Dec. 799,806 (AAO 
2012). The Petitioner did not sufficiently supplement the record of proceedings to establish that these 
advertising organizations are similar. 
The Petitioner has also not sufficiently established that the primary duties and responsibilities of the 
advertised positions are parallel to the proffered position. 10 Notably, the Petitioner did not specify 
within the petition that work experience is required for entry into the proffered position. However, 
some of the job announcements do not appear to involve parallel positions as they require substantial 
experience and skills in addition to a degree requirement. For instance, the job announcement by C­
U- requires at least three years of work experience, and "demonstrated knowledge of federal rules and 
regulations governing grants and contracts administration, including extensive knowledge of 0MB 
Circulars A-110, A-21, A-133, and the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR)," while the 
announcement by S-U- requires at least two years "in non-profit accounting and 10+ years of 
cumulative relevant experience (accounting operations and/or audit) with strong background in budget 
10 It must be noted that even if all of the job postings indicated that a requirement of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations (which they do not), the Petitioner 
has not demonstrated what statistically valid inferences, if any, can be drawn from the adve1iisements with regard to 
determining the common educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations. See generally 
Earl Babbie, The Practice of Social Research 186-228 (1995). Moreover, given that there is no indication that the 
advertisements were randomly selected, the validity of any such inferences could not be accurately determined even if the 
sampling unit were sufficiently large. See id. at 195-196 (explaining that "[r]andom selection is the key to [the] process 
[ of probability sampling]" and that "random selection offers access to the body of probability theory, which provides the 
basis for estimates of population parameters and estimates of error"). 
7 
preparation." As this documentation does not establish that the Petitioner has met this prong of the 
regulations, further analysis regarding the specific information contained in each of the job postings 
is not necessary. 11 That is, not every deficit of every job posting has been addressed. 
The Petitioner also submitted letters from officials employed by S-, the affiliate university which 
provides facilities for the Petitioner on its campus, as well as from an accountant who indicates that 
the Petitioner has hired her accounting firm to perform accounting services, and that she "prepares the 
tax returns for [the Petitioner]," among other things. Each person concludes in their letter that "a 
bachelor's degree with a major in accounting" is required to perform the duties of the proffered 
position. However, the letter writers do not discuss the specific hiring practices of their respective 
organizations and the nature of their accounting positions sufficiently to establish that the 
organizations routinely employ and recruit only degreed individuals for positions that are parallel to 
the instant position. 
Further, furnishing letters from individuals who are employed by entities that are either affiliated with, 
or who perform services for, the Petitioner is inadequate to establish industry-wide, "common" 
standards regarding degree requirements, if any, for parallel positions in similar organizations within 
the accounting industry. It is the Petitioner's burden to prove by a preponderance of evidence that it 
is qualified for the benefit sought. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376. In evaluating the 
evidence, eligibility is to be determined not by the quantity of evidence alone but by its quality. Id. 
The Petitioner has not done so here. Consequently, this material is insufficient to satisfy the 
Petitioner's burden under this criterion. 
Without more, the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to establish that a bachelor's degree 
in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar 
organizations. Consequently, the Petitioner has not satisfied the first prong of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
2. Second Prong 
We will next consider the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2), which is 
satisfied if the Petitioner shows that its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be 
performed only by an individual with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. 
On appeal, the Petitioner objects to the Director's determination in her denial that the Petitioner's job 
descriptions were too generic in nature to establish the asserted complexity and uniqueness of the 
proffered position. Considering the evidence offered in the petition, we agree with the Director that 
the descriptions of the job functions and duties in the record are insufficient to satisfy this criterion's 
requirements. Those descriptions are overly general, which undermines the Petitioner's claims that 
the position's duties are specialized and complex. 
11 The Petitioner did not provide any independent evidence of how representative the job postings are of the particular 
advertising employers' recruiting history for the type of job advertised. As the advertisements are only solicitations for 
hire, they are not evidence of the actual hiring practices of these employers. 
8 
Specifically, while the Petitioner submitted a list of job duties and the approximate percentage of time 
the Beneficiary would devote to certain tasks, the record does not contain a sufficiently detailed 
description of the Beneficiary's duties to establish that the position requires the theoretical and 
practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and the attainment of a baccalaureate 
or higher degree in the specific specialty, or its equivalent. For example, the Petitioner stated that the 
Beneficiary will spend 30 percent of her time: 
Serv[ing] as thel O I in-house accountant responsible for the preparation of 
the IRS annual report. Work[ing] with an independent local accounting firm to meet 
the necessary requirements to prepare and file the IRS annual report. Meet[ing] with 
local firm accountants and review their work to insure accuracy of tax-exempt 
reporting. Ensure maintenance of tax-exempt status. 
The Petitioner also provided a letter from J-, the accountant who indicates that she prepares its tax 
returns and performs other accounting work for the Petitioner. J- states: "I meet with [the Beneficiary] 
several times a year to discuss various accounting issues, such as preparing for the annual audit and 
preparing the annual IRS Form 990 (Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax) .... " Notably, 
J-'s letter gives no sense of the amount of time required for her meetings with the Beneficiary, or the 
frequency of such meetings beyond noting that they occur "several times a years." Further, J-, who 
indicates that "she has been in the accounting profession for twenty-seven years as a Certified Public 
Accountant," gives no indication in her letter that the Beneficiary is charged to "review [her] work to 
insure accuracy of tax-exempt reporting," contrary to the Petitioner's assertion that the Beneficiary 
performs such tasks. 
The Petitioner has not sufficiently detailed the specific duties the Beneficiary would perform under 
the "Annual Report to U.S. Internal Revenue Service" job function, which it maintains will encompass 
30% of her proposed fulltime employment. The Petitioner must resolve these inconsistencies and 
ambiguities in the record with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter 
of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). 
Likewise, the Petitioner asserts that the Beneficiary will collectively spend 45% of her work time 
engaged in preparing and submitting weekly and/or 
1
onthly leports to the Petitioner's domestic and 
foreign affiliate organizations, or to the government of , which must be prepared in accordance 
with the information requirements of those organizations. While the Director requested documentary 
evidence in her RFE which would establish the nature of the Beneficiary's specific duties as they relate 
to the Petitioner's products and services, the Petitioner did not sufficiently address this aspect. 12 For 
example, the Petitioner did not provided copies of the reports that it submits to its affiliates or the 
I I government, documentary evidence of these organization's reporting requirements to 
demonstrate the relative complexity and uniqueness of the work that the Beneficiary will perform 
during 45% of her worktime. 
12 "Failure to submit requested evidence which precludes a material line of inquiry shall be grounds for denying the 
[petition]." 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(14). 
9 
Similarly, though the Petitioner described the job duties of the position, the evidence does not show 
the Petitioner's operational structure in a manner that would establish the Beneficiary's role. On 
appeal, the Petitioner asserts "[g]iven that [the Petitioner] is a relatively new and growing institution, 
and is the first~ accredited university inc=] the duties of the staff accountant requires special 
skill and complexity." However, the Petitioner does not substantiate its conclusions, such that we can 
conclude that the Petitioner has met its burden of proof For instance, while the organization chart 
provided by the Petitioner shows various positions within its financial department, and appears to 
include staff located in both thf:I I affiliate and the Petitioner's organization, the Beneficiary's 
proposed position is not delineated therein. The "accounting section" in the organization chart 
contains seven positions, including four specialists, two special program clerks, and a clerk. Without 
more, this material lends little insight into the proffered position's placement within the Petitioner's 
organizational hierarchy, and thus, does not establish the relative specialization and complexity of the 
position's role as claimed by the Petitioner. 
We also observe that some of the duties presented by the Petitioner, although described in a general 
nature, appear to be more in line with the general duties of the occupational category "Bookkeeping, 
Accounting, and Auditing Clerks" corresponding to the Standard Occupational Classification code 43-
3031.00. According to O*NET, the core duties of this occupational category include: 13 
• Compute, classify, and record numerical data to keep financial records complete. 
• Perform any combination of routine calculating, posting, and verifying duties to obtain 
primary financial data for use in maintaining accounting records. 
• May also check the accuracy of figures, calculations, and postings pertaining to 
business transactions recorded by other workers." 
Similarly, the proffered position's duties discussed in the record include "account[ing] for petty cash 
expenditures and balance[ing] the inter-campus [S-] fund," "reconcil[ing] the student credits and the 
corresponding payment due from [S-] to [the Petitioner]," and "[p ]rocess and track budgeted expenses 
and daily transaction[s]," which appear to be bookkeeping duties. 
While the proffered position may include accounting duties, the record does not sufficiently illustrate 
what these duties actually entail. The generalized descriptions included in the record do not adequately 
convey any particular detail regarding the demands, level of responsibilities, and requirements 
necessary for the performance of the duties. Such generalized information does not in itself establish 
a necessary correlation between any dimension of the proffered position and a need for a particular 
level of education, or educational equivalency, in a body of highly specialized knowledge in a specific 
specialty. In other words, the descriptions provided by the Petitioner are too vague and generic to 
conclude that the position is in fact a wage Level II "Accountants and Auditors" occupation as 
designated on the certified LCA. 14 Therefore, we are unable to determine the complexity and 
uniqueness of the proffered position in relation to other accounting positions within the occupation. 
13 See O*NET Summary Report for "Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks," available at 
https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/43-303 l .OO (last visited Jan. 28, 2020). 
14 This also calls into question whether the LCA corresponds to and supports the H-IB petition, as required. As the position 
is not otherwise approvable we will not explore this issue further other than to advise the Petitioner that it should be 
prepared to address it in any future H-lB filings. 
10 
The Petitioner also claims that the Beneficiary is well qualified for the position, and references her 
qualifications. However, the test to establish a position as a specialty occupation is not the education 
or experience of a proposed beneficiary, but whether the position itself requires at least a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. The Petitioner did not sufficiently develop relative 
complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the duties of the position. Accordingly, the Petitioner has 
not satisfied the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
III. CONCLUSION 
Because the Petitioner has not satisfied one of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), it has not 
demonstrated that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. In visa petition 
proceedings, it is a 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. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
11