dismissed H-1B Case: Accounting

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8656190 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (H-1B) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : FEB. 4, 2021 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification 
for specialty occupations .1 The H-1B 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 California Service Center Director denied the petition , concluding that the Petitioner did not 
establish that the proffered position is a specialty occupation . In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner 's 
burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit by a preponderance of the evidence . 2 
Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 3 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
Section 10l(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b) of the Act defines an H-lB nonimmigrant as a foreign national "who is 
coming temporarily to the United States to perform services .. . in a specialty occupation described in 
section 214(i)(l) .. . "(emphasis added). Section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C . § 1184(i)(l), defines the 
term "specialty occupation" as an occupation that requires "theoretical and practical application of a 
body of highly specialized knowledge , and 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 section 214(i)(l) of the Act but adds a 
non-exhaustive list of fields of endeavor. In addition, 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) provides that the 
proffered position must meet one of four criteria to qualify as a specialty occupation position. 4 Lastly , 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(i)(A)(I) states that an H-lB classification may be granted to a foreign national 
1 See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 10l(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b) , 8 U.S.C. § l 10l(a)(l5)(H)( i)(b). 
2 See Section 291 of the Act; Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). 
3 See Matter of Christo 's Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). 
4 8 C.F.R. § 2 l 4.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A) must be read with the statutory and regulatory definitions of a specialty occupation under 
section 214(i)(l) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). 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. Chertojf, 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"). 
who "will perform services in a specialty occupation ... " ( emphasis added). 
Accordingly, to determine whether the Beneficiary will be employed in a specialty occupation, we 
look to the record to ascertain the services the Beneficiary will perform and whether such services 
require the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge attained 
through at least a bachelor's degree or higher in a specific specialty or its equivalent. Without 
sufficient evidence regarding the duties the Beneficiary will perform, we are unable to determine whether 
the Beneficiary will be employed in an occupation that meets the statutory and regulatory definitions of 
a specialty occupation and a position that also satisfies at least one of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 2 l 4.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A). The services the Beneficiary will perform in the position determine: (1) the normal 
minimum educational requirement for entry into the particular position, which is the focus of criterion 
1; (2) industry positions which are parallel to the proffered position and thus appropriate for review 
for a common degree requirement, under the first alternate prong of criterion 2; (3) the level of 
complexity or uniqueness of the proffered position, which is the focus of the second alternate prong 
of criterion 2; ( 4) the factual justification for a petitioner normally requiring a degree or its equivalent, 
when that is an issue under criterion 3; and ( 5) the degree of specialization and complexity of the 
specific duties, which is the focus of criterion 4. 5 
By regulation, the Director is charged with determining whether the petition involves a specialty 
occupation as defined in section 214(i)(l) of the Act. 6 The Director may request additional evidence 
in the course of making this determination. 7 In addition, a petitioner must establish eligibility at the 
time of filing the petition and must continue to be eligible through adjudication. 8 
II. ANALYSIS 
Upon review of the record in its totality, we conclude that the Petitioner has not adequately established 
the services the Beneficiary will perform, which precludes a determination of whether the proffered 
position qualifies as a specialty occupation under sections 101 (a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b ), 214(i)(l) of the Act; 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(i)(A)(l), 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) and (iii)(A). In addition, the record contains 
inconsistencies that undermine the Petitioner's claims regarding the proffered position. 9 
A. Nature of the Position 
The Petitioner describes itself as an "international and business advisory firm" with "bilingual business 
advisory services." The Petitioner states the Beneficiary will be employed as an "accountant" and in 
response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE) provides the following job duties: 
5 See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
6 See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(i)(B)(2). 
7 See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(8). 
8 See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l). 
9 The Petitioner submitted documentation to suppmt the H-IB petition, including evidence regarding the proffered position 
and its business operations. Although we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and considered 
each one. 
2 
• Examine financial statements to ensure that they are accurate and comply with 
laws and regulations 15% 
• Compute taxes owed, prepare tax returns, and ensure that taxes are paid properly 
and on time 10% 
• Assess financial operations and make best-practices recommendations to 
management 10% 
• Suggest ways to reduce costs, enhance revenues, and improve profits 5% 
• Prepare written reports and meet face-to-face with organization managers and 
individual clients 10% 
• Provide business-focused, results-oriented solutions in identifying the most 
common tax related questions and issues [the Petitioner]'s current and future 
clients have when doing business in the U.S. and in Mexico 10% 
• Assist [the Petitioner]'s Mexican National clients with various compliance 
matters including tax return preparation and voluntary disclosure programs 15%* 
• Work with [the Petitioner's] other[] employees to educate them on the specific 
tax and compliance issues faced by Mexican Nationals[] 15%* 
• Review documentation and research federal, state, and international tax return 
issues. Use the information gathered to further improve [the Petitioner]'s 
procedure for [a]dvising Mexican Nationals[] 10%* 
The Petitioner's initial support letter contained the aforementioned duties and also included: 10 
• Inspect account books and accounting systems for efficiency and use of accepted 
accounting procedures 
• Organize and maintain financial records 
• Gather and organize information on problems or procedures 
• Analyze data gathered and develop solutions or alternative methods of 
proceeding 
• Review forms and reports and confer with managers and clients about format, 
distribution, and purpose, and to identify problems and improvements 
• Train MBA's employees on how to properly advise Mexican-nationals doing 
business in both countries* 
• Travel to MBA's Mexican National client's location to gather information and 
copy documents* 11 
Of the sixteen duties listed in the initial support letter, 6 are taken verbatim from the U.S. Department 
of Labor's (DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook's (Handbook) report on "Accountants and 
Auditors," with no additional detail provided. 12 The Handbook indicates "typical" duties of the 
occupation, broadly written to encompass a number of positions. 13 However, the specific duties of 
the proffered position and the nature of the petitioning entity's business operations, are factors to be 
10 The Petitioner did not provide an explanation clarifying why these duties were amended out. 
11 The* indicates duties performed by the Beneficiary as a "management consultant." 
12 See Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Accountants and Auditors, 
https://www.bls.gov/ooh/business-and-financial/accountants-and-auditors.htm (last visited Feb. 3, 2021 ). 
13 Id. 
3 
considered together. We must examine the ultimate employment of the individual, and determine 
whether the position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 14 For this reason, quoting duties from the 
Handbook in and of itself will not provide the context needed to understand the nature of the position 
and whether it requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge necessary to establish the position as a specialty occupation. 
In this matter the Petitioner provides little context and substantive detail for the duties, which is farther 
highlighted by the record's lack of information on the structure of the company. According to the 
record, the Petitioner is comprised of thirteen employees, with offices in the U.S. and Mexico. 
However, the record does not provide information on the company's hierarchy, staffing levels or the 
overall role of the proffered position. Without information on the organizational structure, we are 
unable to ascertain from the broadly worded duties, for example, who the Beneficiary will be making 
best practices recommendations and suggestions to, what level of management he is meeting with, 
what employees he will be training and working with, i.e. management or administrative personnel, 
what level of responsibility is afforded to the position, whether the work he will perform is specialized 
in nature, etc. 
Without a more meaningful job description, we are also unable to ascertain the level of education and 
knowledge necessary to perform the duties of the position. According to the Petitioner, the position 
requires at least a bachelor's degree in accounting, or a closely related field. However, the Petitioner 
does not sufficiently relate the duties to its stated degree requirement. For example, the Petitioner 
does not describe what financial statements the Beneficiary will examine and how accounting 
principles would be required to perform the duty. When computing taxes owed and preparing tax 
returns, it is not clear whether the Beneficiary will be using a software tool to plug in numbers or will 
be performing higher level tax assessments. If the Beneficiary is using specialized tools or programs, 
the duties do not describe them or any specialized knowledge from accounting that would be necessary 
to use them. Other duties, such as organizing and maintaining financial records and gathering 
information on problems, are so broadly worded, they could be performed by any number of 
occupations and any number of fields of study could provide the knowledge to perform them, including 
study at a level lower than that of a bachelor's degree. Without a substantive explanation and context 
for how the duties relate to the Petitioner's business, we are unable to determine what, if any, 
specialized knowledge attained through a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty would be 
required as a minimum for entry into the occupation. 15 
14 See generally Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). 
15 On appeal, counsel states "[t]he nature of the international business that current petitioner operates; affords them to 
contrast the limited framework of the practices stated in the [ Handbook]." Counsel also adds, "Petitioner's accounting 
needs are not within the confines of the traditional business interactions, but rather, they are complex, multidimensional 
and polyfactorial." Counsel appears to assert that the duties of the proffered position are more complicated than the 
"typical" accountant duties presented in the Handbook due to the nature of the Petitioner's business. However, the 
Petitioner does not describe its business with enough detail to understand its nature or the complexity of the accounting 
services it performs to substantiate counsel's statements. For example, the support letter's description of the business is 
limited to a few sentences, the opinion letters do not add additional details, and the company printouts describe the 
Petitioner's services and do not provide context for the proffered position's role. 
4 
The Petitioner submits an opm10n letter dated October 1, 2019 authored by 
Professor! I at .... l ---""'--',IU-n-iv-e-rs-it_y_,-:-:16_w_h-ic~h 
discusses the specialized nature of the proffered position. However, the professor's letter does not 
provide details explaining the substantive nature of the position. 17 After describing his educational 
background and professional experience, the professor states he examined the responsibilities of the 
position in detail and in forming his opinion he reviewed the Director's RFE, the Handbook, the 
O*NET, and the Petitioner's support letter. 18 The professor then summarily states the background 
required for the proffered position "can only be obtained through a Bachelor's degree in the field of 
Accounting or closely related fields." He does not define what he means by a "related field" or why 
any other degree would not lead to a sufficiently similar knowledge set. Within this conclusory and 
exclusionary statement, the professor rules out any other means one could utilize to attain the requisite 
knowledge, undermining the evidentiary weight of his statements. Furthermore, the professor adds, 
the skills required to prepare tax returns and ensure that taxes are paid, examine 
financial statements to ensure they are accurate and provide business-focused, results 
oriented solutions are learned and refined through courses of Accounting or closely 
related fields including Financial Accounting, Managerial Accounting, Tax Planning 
and Administration, Auditing, Accounting Information Systems, and Quantitative 
Methods and Analysis. 
However, the titles of courses do not in and of themselves identify the specialized knowledge they 
would impart to perform the position's tasks or explain their relevance to the job duties. While the 
professor may draw inferences that certain courses or knowledge obtained through a bachelor's degree 
program in accounting may be beneficial in performing certain duties of the position, we disagree with 
the conclusion that such a degree is required in order to perform them. 
In addition, the professor has not sufficiently explained or documented why the duties are so highly 
specialized that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty is required. While we have reviewed the 
opinion letter presented, it has little probative value as it does not include sufficient specific analysis 
of the duties of the particular position nor does it sufficiently relate those duties to the stated 
educational qualifications required to perform them. 19 The professor's summary statements are 
16 The Petitioner provides another letter dated March 22, 2018 by the professor discussing the Beneficiary's qualifications. 
17 On appeal, in order to supp011 the specialized nature of the proffered position, counsel asse1is that the "field of accounting 
is evolving as business practices include international and multi-transnational operations. These global transactions impose 
on business owners, like petitioner, the need to seek employees with specialize[ d] knowledge in financial and accounting 
practices relevant outside the United States and still acceptable to US regulatory standards." Counsel provides no 
explanation for his statements, his assertions are not substantiated in the record, either with the Petitioner's statements or 
other probative evidence, and do not constitute evidence. See Matter of Obaigbena, 19 T&N Dec. 533, 534 n.2 (BIA 1988) 
( citing Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 T&N Dec. 503, 506 (BIA 1980)). 
18 The professor also states that in formulating his opinion on the specialized nature of the proffered position he reviewed 
the Beneficiary's degree certificates, transcripts and resume and the Beneficiary's verification of employment letters. 
However, a beneficiary's credentials to perform a particular job are relevant only when the job is found to be a specialty 
occupation. 
19 See 1756, Inc. v. Att): Gen, 745 F. Supp. 9, 17 (D.D.C. 1990) (finding USCIS acted properly in not crediting petitioner's 
conclusory assertions); see also Xiaotong Liu v. Baran, No. SACV1800376JVSKESX, 2018 WL 7348851, at *10 (C.D. 
Cal. Dec. 21, 2018) (finding USCIS acted properly when it determined that such generalizations do not explain how the 
author came to their conclusion, which is insufficient to meet the regulatory requirements). 
5 
unsupported by explanations, references to the record, or citations to studies, surveys, industry 
publications, authoritative publications, or other sources of empirical information. The conclusion the 
Petitioner requests us to draw from the professor's letter is not self-evident, and we are not required to 
accept cursory or primarily conclusory statements as demonstrating eligibility.20 
Furthermore, the information in the record raises questions as to whether the submitted labor condition 
application (LCA) corresponds with the petition. In its support letter, the Petitioner states that the 
Beneficiary has been in its employ since November 2016 as a "management consultant." On the LCA 
submitted in support of the H-1 B petition, the Petitioner designated the proffered position under the 
occupational category "Accountants and Auditors" corresponding to the standard occupational 
classification (SOC) code 13-2011. 21 In response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner clarifies the 
proffered position is classified as SOC code 13-2011.01 "Accountants," a subcategory under 
"Accountants and Auditors." However, the duties the Beneficiary performed as a management 
consultant are integrated into his current duties. Management consultants are categorized under the 
occupational category SOC 13-1111.00 "Management Analysts." Based on the percentage allotment, 
at least 40% of the Beneficiary's duties were formerly performed as a management consultant and a 
number of additional duties also align with the occupational category. 22 If the Petitioner's duties for 
the position fall under more than one occupational category, it should have chosen the relevant 
occupational code for the highest paying occupation, which is not "Accountants." 23 This discrepancy 
undermines whether the LCA corresponds to the petition, including the occupational category certified 
therein. 24 
In addition, the Petitioner selected the Level I wage on the LCA as consonant with the job 
requirements, necessary experience, education, and special skills/other requirements of the proffered 
position. 25 Any special skills or other requirements which are not usually part of the occupation will 
20 See Matter of Caron Int 'l, 19 l&N Dec. at 795 (finding the service is not required to accept or may give less weight to 
an advisory opinion when it is "not in accord with other information or is in any way questionable.") 
21 A petitioner submits the LCA to DOL to demonstrate that it will pay an H-1 B 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. See Section 2 l 2(n)(l) of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 655.731 (a). 
22 Management Analysts "[g]ather and organize information on problems or procedures" and "[a]nalyze data gathered and 
develop solutions or alternative methods of proceeding." See O*NET OnLine Summary Report for "13-1111.01 -
Management Analysts," https://www.onetonline.org/ Archive_ ONET-SOC _ 201 O _Taxonomy_ 09 _ 2020/link/summary/13-
1111.00 (last visited Feb. 3, 2021 ). These duties are listed verbatim for the proffered position. Additional duties of the 
proffered position, such as reviewing forms, conferring with personnel concerned, identifying improvements and training 
workers also align with the occupation. Id. In addition, examining financial statements and making best practice 
recommendations are also duties performed by "Management Analysts." See Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of 
Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Management Analysts, https://www.bls.gov/ooh/business-and­
financial/management-analysts.htm (last visited Feb. 3, 2021 ). 
23 See U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Detennination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. 
Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009); http://flcdatacenter.com/download/NPWHCGuidance _Revised_ 11 _ 2009.pdf. 
At the time the Petitioner's LCA was certified, the Level I prevailing wage in the area of intended employment was $28.36 
per hour for "Management Analysts," which is higher than the prevailing wage for "Accountants" which was $25.39 per 
hour. See https:/ /tlcdatacenter.com/OESWizardStart.aspx. 
24 See Section 212(n)(l) of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 655.73l(a). 
25 A prevailing 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. See U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & 
Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance, available at 
http://flcdatacenter.com/download/NPWHC _Guidance_ Revised_ 11 _ 2009 .pdf 
6 
generally require an increase in the wage level. 26 The Petitioner states it seeks someone with 
"experience in Mexican tax law and tax compliance" 27 and some of the duties require knowledge of 
Mexican law, which is outside the scope of the knowledge and skills described for the occupation 
"Accountants." 28 For example, a duty that will consume about fifteen percent of the Beneficiary's 
time, has the Beneficiary working with the Petitioner's employees to educate them on the specific tax 
and compliance issues faced by Mexican Nationals. Also, the duties presented initially in the 
Petitioner's support letter included "[t]ravel to [the Petitioner's] Mexican National client's location to 
gather information and copy documents." The Petitioner does not state how frequently the Beneficiary 
would travel 29 and later removes this duty in the amended list of duties. If this duty is included in 
another category or would no longer be performed by the Beneficiary, it was not explained in the 
record. In addition, the Petitioner refers to itself as one that "provides bilingual business advisory 
services." While fluency in another language is not listed as a requirement for the proffered position, 
it seems implied within the job duties. These additional requirements placed on the proffered position 
also indicate that the LCA submitted in support of the petition is not in accord with the proffered job 
duties. The Petitioner has not reconciled the Level I wage rate with its claims about this position's 
duties and the inherent requirements of those duties. 3° For this reason, even if it were determined that 
the proffered position requires at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, 
such that it would qualify as a specialty occupation, which it does not, the petition could still not be 
approved because the record lacks an LCA that corresponds to a Level II or higher position. The 
Petitioner has not demonstrated that the LCA corresponds with the petition as required by 20 C.F.R. 
§ 655.705(b). 
B. Beneficiary's Qualifications 
On appeal, counsel confuses the issue of a beneficiary's qualifications with the issue of a proffered 
position's qualifications as a specialty occupation. However, the test to establish a position as a 
specialty occupation is not the skill set or education of a proposed beneficiary, but whether the position 
itself qualifies as a specialty occupation. Thus, whether or not the Beneficiary, in this case, has the 
required education and experience in the specific specialty is irrelevant to the issue of whether the 
proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation, i.e., whether the duties of the proffered position 
require the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge and the 
attainment of a bachelor's degree or higher in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 31 Again, a 
26 The employer's requirements for experience, education, training, and special skills shall be compared to those generally 
required for an occupation as described in O*NET. If there are any requirements above those generally required for an 
occupation, then one or more points should be added to the appropriate wage column(s). See U.S. Dep't of Labor. Emp't 
& Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs, supra. 
27 The Petitioner does not state how many years of experience would be required. 
28 See O*NET OnLine Summary Report for "13-2011.01 - Accountants," https://www.onetonline.org/Archive_ONET­
SOC_201 O _ Taxonomy_09 _ 2020/link/summary/13-201 l .01 (last visited Feb. 3, 2021 ); see also Bureau of Labor Statistics, 
U.S. Dep't of Labor. Occupational Outlook Handbook, Accountants and Auditors, https://www.bls.gov/ooh/business-and­
financial/accountants-and-auditors.htm (last visited Feb. 3, 2021 ). 
29 The Petitioner does not provide sufficient information regarding the order of importance or frequency of occurrence 
( e.g., regularly. periodically, or at irregular intervals) with which the Beneficiary will perform the duties initially presented 
in its support letter. For this reason, we are unable to ascertain what portion of the Beneficiary's duties will require travel. 
30 The Petitioner must resolve these inconsistencies with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. 
Matter of Ho, 19 l&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). 
31 See Section 214(i)(l) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). 
7 
beneficiary's credentials to perform a particular job are relevant only when the job is found to be a 
specialty occupation. As discussed in this decision, the Petitioner has not established that the proffered 
position requires the "theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, 
and 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." Therefore, we need not and will not 
address the Beneficiary's qualifications further, except to note that, in any event, the combined 
evaluation of the Beneficiary's education and work experience submitted by the Petitioner is 
insufficient to establish that the Beneficiary possesses the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree in 
any specific specialty. Specifically, the claimed equivalency was based in part on experience; 
however, there is no evidence that the Beneficiary has recognition of expertise in the specialty through 
progressively responsible positions directly related to the specialty. 32 As such, since evidence was not 
presented that the Beneficiary has at least a U.S. bachelor's degree in any specific specialty, or its 
equivalent, the petition could not be approved even if eligibility for the benefit sought had been 
otherwise established. 
III. CONCLUSION 
Upon review of the totality of the evidence submitted, the Petitioner has not provided sufficient 
substantive detail regarding the duties the Beneficiary will perform, and the record has inconsistencies 
that undermine the Petitioner's claims regarding the proffered position. Therefore, we are unable to 
determine the substantive nature of the work and whether the Beneficiary will be employed in a position 
that satisfies at least one of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) and an occupation that meets the 
statutory and regulatory definitions of a specialty occupation as defined by section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. § 1184(i)(l), 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii), and (iii)(A). In visa petition proceedings, it is the 
petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. 33 The Petitioner has not 
met that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
32 See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C)(4). 
33 See Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. 
8