dismissed H-1B Case: Accounting

identifylag data deleted to 
prevent crJearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rrn. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: WAC 04 210 51261 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: JUL 1 4 2Q06 
IN RE: 
PETITION: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(l S)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 1 Ol(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
/5G&i?kdiv Administrative Appea Office 
WAC 04 210 51261 
Page 2 . 
DISCUSSION: The director of the California Service Center denied the nonimmigrant visa petition and the 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. The 
petition will be denied. 
The petitioner is a wholesaler of trimmings and bridal accessories, with five employees. It seeks to extend its 
employment of the beneficiary as an accountant pursuant to section lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 9 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b). The director denied the petition based on his 
determination that the record failed to establish the proffered position as a specialty occupation. 
The record of proceeding before the AAO contains: (1) Form 1-129 and supporting documentation; (2) the 
director's request for evidence; (3) counsel's response to the director's request; (4) the director's denial letter; 
and (5) Form I-290B, with counsel's brief. The AAO reviewed the record in its entirety before reaching its 
decision. 
The issue before the AAO is whether the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. To meet its 
burden of proof in this regard, the petitioner must establish that the job it is offering to the beneficiary meets 
the following statutory and regulatory requirements. 
Section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 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 term "specialty occupation" is further defined at 8 C.F.R. 8 214.2(h)(4)(ii) as: 
An occupation which requires theoretical and practical application of a body of highly 
specialized knowledge in fields of human endeavor including, but not limited to, architecture, 
engineering, mathematics, physical sciences, social sciences, medicine and health, education, 
business specialties, accounting, law, theology, and the arts, and which requires the 
attainment of a bachelor's degree or higher in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, as a 
minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States. 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 9 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty occupation, the position must meet one of 
the following criteria: 
(I) 
 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 
WAC 04 210 51261 
Page 3 
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. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) interprets the term "degree" in the above criteria to mean not just 
any baccalaureate or higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proffered 
position. 
To determine whether a particular job qualifies as a specialty occupation, CIS does not simply rely on a 
position's title. The specific duties of the proffered position, combined with the nature of the petitioning 
entity's business operations, are factors to be considered. CIS must examine the ultimate employment of the 
alien, and determine whether the position qualifies as a specialty occupation. Cf: Defensor v. Meissner, 201 
F. 3d 384 (5th Cir. 2000). The critical element is not the title of the position nor an employer's self-imposed 
standards, but whether the position actually 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 
as the minimum for entry into the occupation, as required by the Act. 
The petitioner seeks the beneficiary's services as an accountant. 
 Evidence of the beneficiary's duties 
includes: the Form 1-129; the petitioner's July 14, 2004 letter in support of the petition; and counsel's 
December 2, 2004 response to the director's request for evidence. As stated by the petitioner, the duties of 
the proffered position would require the beneficiary to: 
Prepare cash flow projections, including the amount of cash expenditures and how 
these expenses will be applied; and prepare budgetary projections, requiring an 
analysis of income, expenses and capital expenditures and the preparation of sales, 
costing and administrative budgeting, and the analysis of standard and variable costs; 
Engage in inventory control analysis to allow the petitioner to better ascertain 
inventoried items presently in stock and to better anticipate future inventories; 
Analyze and prepare financial statements, including an explanation of variances and 
potential tax consequences and recommendations as to how to rectify discrepancies; 
prepare profit and loss statements and balance sheets; 
Establish and modify a computerized accounting software system to meet the 
petitioner's specific needs; 
Research and explain new federal and state tax policies and their consequences, using 
new tax cuts for the petitioner's benefit; 
Assist in IRSIstate tax audits, negotiating and settling any tax liabilities, and 
documenting and explaining the negotiation and settlement of pastlpresent liability 
accounts; 
WAC 04 210 51261 
Page 4 
Conduct audits of the petitioner's annual, quarterly and periodic financial statements 
and determine whether the statements are fairly stated in accordance with generally 
accepted accounting principles; 
Conduct a compliance audit of the petitioner's loans, adherence to tax law, and 
contractual agreements to determine whether requirements have been met; 
Conduct an operational audit to determine whether the petitioner's business activities 
are functioning efficiently, effectively, economically and optimally; and 
Establish a system of quality control to ensure that the work being performed by the 
petitioner meets applicable professional standards, regulatory requirements and 
general standards of quality; that a particular client or potential client is financially 
viable; and to ensure that the petitioner's daily operations are free of conflicts of 
interest and that management does not misrepresent facts or subordinate proper 
judgment to other employees. 
To make its determination whether the employment just described qbalifies as a specialty occupation, the 
AAO turns to the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 8 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(I) and (2): a baccalaureate or higher degree or its 
equivalent is the normal minimum requirement for entry into the particular position; and a degree requirement 
is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations or a particular position is so 
complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with a degree. Factors considered by the 
AAO when determining these criteria include: whether the Department of Labor's Occupational Outlook 
Handbook (Handbook), on which the AAO routinely relies for the educational requirements of particular 
occupations, reports 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 attest that such firms "routinely employ and recruit only degreed individuals." See Shanti, Inc. v. 
Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1 15 1, 1 165 (D. Minn. 1999) (quoting Hird/Blaker Corp. v. Suva, 712 F. Supp. 1095, 
I 102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). 
In his denial, the director found the duties described by the petitioner to reflect many of those performed by 
accountants, but determined that the petitioner did not have the type of business or the organizational 
complexity and scale to require the services of a full- or part-time accountant. While, as discussed below, the 
AAO does not find the record to demonstrate that the petitioner would employ the beneficiary in a position 
requiring a degreed accountant, it has reached its conclusions on grounds other than those relied upon by the 
director. 
The AAO finds the director to have erred in concluding that the petitioner does not have the organizational 
complexity, nor operate the type of business that would require an accountant. The 2006-2007 edition of the 
Handbook indicates that accountants work throughout private industry and government, helping to ensure that 
the "Nation's firms are run efficiently, its public records kept accurately, and its taxes paid properly and on 
time."' It does not indicate that the accountants are employed solely by public accounting, payroll services, 
and tax preparation firms; computer accounting systems, software developers, or government agencies, as 
stated by the director. Accordingly, the petitioner's need for an accountant may not be discounted based on 
its type of business. Neither does the fact that the petitioner does not employ an accounting/bookkeeping staff 
I 
 Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2006-2007 Edition, at www.bls.gov/oco/ocos00I .htm. 
WAC 04 210 51261 
Page 5 
2 
establish that it would not employ the beneficiary to perform the duties of an accountant. 
 Therefore, the 
AAO withdraws the director's findings in this regard. 
The petitioner has stated that the proffered position is that of an accountant and has offered a description of 
the position that lists the duties typically performed by accountants. As discussed by the 2006-2007 edition of 
the Handbook, management accountants, the category of accounting most closely aligned to the duties 
described by the petitioner, are individuals who: 
[rlecord and analyze the financial information of the companies for which they work. Among 
their other responsibilities are budgeting, performance evaluation, cost management, and 
asset management . . . . They analyze and interpret the financial information that corporate 
executives need in order to make sound business decisions. They also prepare financial 
reports for other groups, including stockholders, creditors, regulatory agencies, and tax 
authorities. Within accounting departments, management accountants may work in various 
3 
areas, including financial analysis, planning and budgeting, and cost accounting. 
However, while the above discussion is generally reflected in the petitioner's description of the duties of the 
proffered position, this similarity does not establish the proffered position as that of a management 
accountant, which imposes a degree requirement on the beneficiary. The duties described by the petitioner, 
although they describe accounting employment, do not indicate the specific tasks that would be performed by 
the beneficiary in connection with the petitioner's wholesale business, a surprising deficiency in that the 
beneficiary is the incumbent of the proffered position. 
As previously noted, the AAO requires information regarding the actual responsibilities of a proffered 
position to make its determination regarding the nature of that position and its degree requirements, if any. 
See Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F. 3d 384 (5th Cir. 2000). Without such information, the AAO is unable to 
determine the tasks to be performed by a beneficiary on a day-to-day basis and, therefore, whether a proffered 
position's duties are of sufficient complexity to require the minimum of a baccalaureate degree or its 
equivalent. As the record in the instant case offers no meaningful description of the proffered position's 
responsibilities, the petitioner is unable to establish that the duties of the position are accounting duties that 
would require a level of accounting knowledge that is signified by at least a bachelor's degree or its 
equivalent in accounting. Accordingly, the petitioner has failed to establish the proffered position as a 
specialty occupation under the first criterion at 8 C.F.R. 8 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(I) - a baccalaureate or higher 
degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the particular position. 
The deficiencies in the evidence of record are not, however, limited to the petitioner's generalized description 
of the duties to be performed by the beneficiary. The AAO also finds the documentation submitted by the 
petitioner in support of the Form 1-129 to be insufficient to establish the proffered position, as described, as a 
specialty occupation under any of the four alternate criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
The AAO notes that the petitioner's organizational chart indicates that it employs a single individual to 
perform the duties of office manager and bookkeeper. 
Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2006-2007 Edition., at www.bls.gov/oco/ocos001 .htm. 
WAC 04 210 51261 
Page 6 
At the time of filing, counsel asserted that the petitioner's recent growth and expansion has created a backlog 
in its ability to provide up-to-date financial information. While this assertion is somewhat unusual in that the 
petitioner is seeking simply to extend the beneficiary's part-time accounting employment, the AAO has, 
nevertheless, reviewed the record for evidence of the effects of the petitioner's expansion on its finances, as 
well as its financial structure and operations, to determine whether the complexity/extent of the petitioner's 
financial operations would impose a degree requirement on the beneficiary. However, the record contains no 
documentation that supports counsel's claims regarding the growth of the petitioner's business or that 
describes the nature and extent of the financial operations required to support its trimming and bridal 
accessories business. Although the petitioner has submitted copies of its 2003 tax return showing gross 
revenues of more than $2.4 million, DE-6 Quarterly Wage Reports for 2003 and an organizational chart 
identifying its employees by title and name, this documentation offers no insight into the business or financial 
operations that it claims require a degreed accountant. Without documentary evidence to support the claim, 
the assertions of counsel will not satisfy the petitioner's burden of proof. The assertions of counsel do not 
constitute evidence. Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533, 534 (BIA 1988); Matter of Laureano, 19 I&N 
Dec. 1 (BIA 1 983); Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 1 7 I&N Dec. 503, 506 (BIA 1980). 
In that the record contains no evidence to establish the nature or scope of its business/financial operations, the 
petitioner has failed to demonstrate that they are of sufficient complexity to establish that the beneficiary 
would be employed in a position requiring a level of accounting knowledge that may only be obtained 
through a baccalaureate degree in accountancy. 
In reaching its decision, the AAO has considered the expert opinions - the letter authored by an accounting 
professor at California State University, Fullerton and that provided by the head of a California accounting 
firm - that have been submitted by the petitioner to establish that the proffered position requires a degreed 
accountant. On appeal, counsel asserts that these opinions establish the proffered position as a specialty 
occupation under the first criterion. The AAO does not agree. 
The letter from the Fullerton professor indicates that the proffered position is that of an accountant and, 
therefore, requires a baccalaureate degree in such areas as accounting, business administration or finance. He 
states that he has extensive accounting and auditing experience, and has worked with "hundreds of company 
Accountants representing both small and large firms." The record does not, however, offer any evidence to 
support the professor's claims regarding his expertise in the field of accounting. Accordingly, it does not 
establish his authority to speak to the normal hiring requirements of U.S. employers filling accountancy 
positions. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient to meet the burden of 
proof in these proceedings. See Matter of Sof$ci, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of 
Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). 
The head of the California accounting firm also indicates that the duties of the proffered position are of an 
"accounting-related nature" and that a typical person performing such duties would have to obtain a 
bachelor's degree in accounting, business administration or finance. While the AAO acknowledges the 
author's expertise in the field of accounting, his opinion as to the education required to perform accounting 
duties is, in light of information provided by the 2006-2007 Handbook, insufficient to establish U.S. 
employers' hiring practices regarding entry-level accounting positions. The author did not cite any industry 
surveys, trade publications or other industry data in support of his conclusions. Going on record without 
supporting documentation is not sufficient to meet the burden of proof in these proceedings. See Matter of 
WAC 04 210 51261 
Page 7 
SofJici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 
(Reg. Comm. 1972)). 
The Handbook reports that not all accounting employment is performed by degreed accountants. 
 Its 
discussion of the occupation of accountants clearly indicates that accounting positions may be filled by 
individuals holding associate degrees or certificates, or who have acquired their accounting expertise through 
experience: 
Capable accountants and auditors may advance rapidly; those having inadequate academic 
preparation may be assigned routine jobs and find promotion difficult. Many graduates of 
junior colleges or business or correspondence schools, as well as bookkeepers and accounting 
clerks who meet the education and experience requirements set by their employers, can 
obtain junior accounting positions and advance to positions with more responsibilities by 
demonstrating their accounting skills on the job.4 
Further proof of the range of academic backgrounds that may prepare an individual for accounting 
employment is provided by the credentialing practices of the Accreditation Council for Accountancy and 
Taxation (ACAT), an independent accrediting and monitoring organization affiliated with the National 
Society of Accountants. The ACAT does not require a degree in accounting or a related specialty to issue a 
credential as an Accredited Business Accountant03 /Accredited Business Advisor03 (ABA). Eligibility for the 
eight-hour comprehensive examination for the ABA credential requires only three years of "verifiable 
experience in accounting, taxation, financial services, or other fields requiring a practical and theoretical 
knowledge of the subject matter covered on the ACAT Comprehensive Examination." Up to two of the 
required years of work experience may be satisfied through college   red it.^ 
Therefore, the expert opinion of the head of the California accounting firm does not establish the proffered 
position as a specialty occupation under the first criterion. While relevant to these proceedings, it does not 
carry the authority of the Handbook, which offers an overview of national hiring practices, draws on personal 
interviews with individuals employed in the occupation or from websites, published training materials and 
interviews with the organizations granting degrees, certification or licenses in the field, to reach its 
conclusions regarding the U.S. employers' practices when hiring accountants. Accordingly, neither of the 
expert opinions submitted by the petitioner establishes the proffered position as employment that would 
impose a degree requirement on the beneficiary. 
The AAO also notes that the expert opinions submitted by the petitioner both state they are based on the 
generalized outline of accounting duties provided in the petitioner's July 14, 2004 letter in support of the 
Form 1-129. Accordingly, they respond to a list of responsibilities that the AAO does not find to provide a 
meaningful description of the proffered position. For this reason, as well, they are insufficient to establish a 
degree requirement for the proffered position. The AAO may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions 
statements submitted as expert testimony. However, where an opinion is not in accord with other information 
4 
 Ib id. 
5 
Information provided by the ACAT website (httv://www.acatcredentiaIs.orn/index.html). The Handbook 
identifies the ACAT website as one of several "Sources of Additional Information" at the end of its 
discussion of the occupation of accountants. 
WAC 04 210 51261 
Page 8 
or is in any way questionable, the AAO is not required to accept it or may give it less weight. Matter of 
Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791 (Comm. 1988). 
To establish the proffered position as a specialty occupation under the second criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
$ 214.2(h)(4)(A), a petitioner must prove that a specific degree requirement is common to its industry in 
parallel positions among similar organizations or that the proffered position is so complex or unique that it 
can be performed only by an individual with a degree. In the instant case, the petitioner has submitted more 
than 20 Internet job announcements for accountants, each showing a degree requirement for the position 
advertised. These announcements do not, however, satisfy the requirements of the criterion's first prong. 
Of the announcements, none appear to come from organizations similar to the petitioner, a wholesaler of 
trimmings and bridal accessories. Instead, they are published by manufacturing businesses, CPA firms, a 
financial organization, an insurance company, a hospital, an information technology business, a polling and 
management consultancy firm, and other organizations that did not identify the nature of their operations. 
Neither do the announcements describe duties that may be considered parallel to those of the proffered 
position. Only two advertisements, both from unidentified employers, outline duties that are generally like 
those described by the petitioner. Accordingly, these materials do not establish the petitioner's degree 
requirement as the norm within its industry, in parallel positions among similar organizations, as required by 
the first prong. 
The AAO also concludes that the record before it does not establish that the position qualifies as a specialty 
occupation under the second prong at 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) -- the position is so complex or unique 
that it can be performed only by an individual with a degree. It finds no evidence that would support such a 
finding. Accordingly, the petitioner has not established its position as a specialty occupation under either 
prong of the second criterion. Moreover, the petitioner's failure to provide a specific and detailed description 
of the proffered position's duties precludes it from establishing the proffered position as parallel to any 
degreed positions within similar organizations in its industry or from distinguishing it as more complex or 
unique than similar, but non-degreed employment. . 
The AAO next considers the criteria at 8 C.F.R. $5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3) and (4): the employer normally 
requires a degree or its equivalent for the position; and the nature of the specific duties is so specialized and 
complex that the knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with the attainment of a 
baccalaureate or higher degree. 
To determine whether a proffered position may be established as a specialty occupation under the third 
criterion - the employer normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the position - the AAO usually 
reviews the petitioner's past employment practices, as well as the histories, including the names and dates of 
employment, of those employees with degrees who previously held the position, and copies of those 
employees' diplomas. In the instant case, the petitioner has indicated that it has not hired an accountant prior 
to its employment of the beneficiary, and, therefore, has no hiring history regarding the proffered position. 
Accordingly, the record does not establish the proffered position as a specialty occupation under the third 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3). 
WAC 04 210 51261 
Page 9 
The fourth criterion requires a petitioner to establish that the nature of the specific duties of the proffered 
position is so specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with 
the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree. As proof that the proffered position's duties satisfy the 
criterion's specialized and complex threshold, counsel, on appeal, again references the expert opinions of the 
Fullerton accounting professor and the head of the California accounting firm. Both individuals indicate that 
they have reviewed the duties of the proffered position and find them to require a degreed accountant. 
The Fullerton professor states that his opinion is based on his understanding that the beneficiary would be 
required to provide cash flow projections; budgetary projections, including a detailed analysis of sales; 
costing and administrative budgeting; financial statement preparation and analysis; profit and loss statements, 
balance sheet preparation;, the implementation of internal control procedures; and the development of a 
computerized accounting software system. The accounting firm head indicates that cash flow and budgetary 
projections must be performed by a degreed professional. He also states that the preparation of financial 
statements, financial analysis, the development and modification of a computerized accounting software 
system, tadauditing research, consultation services and the preparation of balance sheets and profit and loss 
statements require a four-year degree. 
However, as previously discussed, both writers indicate that their opinions are based on the petitioner's 
description of the proffered position's duties in its July 14, 2004 letter of support, a description that the AAO 
has found to better describe the general employment of accountants rather than the specific tasks to be 
performed by the beneficiary. Accordingly, as they are based on evidence that the AAO does not find 
persuasive, the AAO will not accept these opinions. The AAO may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions 
statements submitted as expert testimony. However, where an opinion is not in accord with other information 
or is in any way questionable, CIS not required to accept it or may give less weight to that evidence. Matter 
of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791 (Comm. 1988). Accordingly, the record does not establish the 
proffered position as a specialty occupation under the fourth criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
In reaching its decision, the AAO is aware that the petitioner has been employing the beneficiary as an H-IB 
worker in the proffered position, based on a previously approved petition. CIS' approval of this earlier 
petition does not, however, establish a basis for approving the instant Form 1-129. 
6 
The record does not indicate whether the director reviewed the record on which the prior decision was 
reached. However, if that record contained no evidence beyond that found in the instant case, then CIS would 
have erred in approving the previously filed petition. CIS is not bound to approve applications or petitions 
In response to the director's request for evidence, counsel submitted a copy of a 2004 CIS memorandum 
entitled The SigniJicance of a Prior CIS Approval of a Nonimmigrant Petition in the Context of a Subsequent 
Determination Regarding Eligibility for Extension of Petition Validity. This guidance indicates that Service 
Center adjudicators are to give deference to previous approvals where there is no material change in 
underlying facts. Memorandum from William R. Yates, Associate Director for Operations, Citizenship and 
Immigration Services, The SigniJcance of a Prior CIS Approval of a Nonimmigrant Petition in the Context of 
a Subsequent Determination Regarding Eligibility for Extension of Petition Validity, HQOPRD 7211 1.3 (April 
23, 2004). However, prior approvals do not preclude CIS from denying an extension of the original visa 
based on a reassessment of the petitioner's qualifications. Texas A&M Univ. v. Upchurch, 99 Fed. Appx. 556, 
2004 WL 1240482 (5th Cir. 2004). 
WAC 04 210 51261 
Page 10 
where eligibility has not been demonstrated merely because of prior approvals that may have been erroneous. 
See, e.g. Matter of Church Scientology International, 19 I&N Dec. 593, 597 (Comm. 1988). Further, each 
petition filing is a separate proceeding with a separate record and CIS is limited to the information contained 
in that record in reaching its decision. 8 C.F.R. $3 103.2(b)(16)(ii) and 103.8(d). Moreover, the AAO's 
authority over the director is comparable to the relationship between a court of appeals and a district court. 
Even if a director had approved a nonimmigrant petition on behalf of a previous beneficiary, the AAO would 
not be bound to follow that decision. Louisiana Philharmonic Orchestra v. INS, 2000 WL 282785 (E.D.La.), 
afd, 248, F.3d 1139 (5th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 122 S.Ct. 51 (2001). 
For reasons related in the preceding discussion, the petitioner has failed to establish the proffered position as a 
specialty occupation. Accordingly, the AAO shall not disturb the director's denial of the petition. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
$ 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.