dismissed H-1B Case: Accounting And Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OFT-. INC. 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JUNE L 2016 
PETITION: FORM 1-129. PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner. an information technology consulting business. seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as an .. accounting and financial analyst" under the H-1 B nonimmigrant classification for 
specialty occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) § 101(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b). 
8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). The H-18 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 ofhighly 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. Vennont Service Center. initially approved the petition. Subsequently a U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration (USCIS) officer conducted a site visit and follow-up phone interview 
with regard to the H-1 B petition, and the Director ultimately revoked the approval of the petition. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeal. the Petitioner submits additional evidence and 
asserts that the Director erred in the decision. Upon de noro review. we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. REVOCATION 
USCIS may revoke the approval of an H-1 B petition. on notice and an opportunity to rebut. pursuant 
to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 11 )(iii). which states the following: 
(A) Grounds for revocation. The director shall send to the petitioner a notice of intent to 
revoke the petition in relevant part if he or she finds that: 
( 1) The beneficiary is no longer employed by the petitioner in the capacity specified in 
the petition. or if the beneficiary is no longer receiving training as specified in the 
petition; or 
(2) The statement of facts contained in the petition was not true and correct. inaccurate. 
fraudulent. or misrepresented a material fact: or 
(3) The petitioner violated terms and conditions of the approved petition: or 
)\latter <?f T-, Inc. 
(·/)The petitioner violated requirements of section I Ol(a)( 15)(H) of the Act or paragraph 
(h) ofthis section: or 
(5) The approval of the petition violated paragraph (h) of this section or involved gross 
error. 
(B) Notice and decision. The notice of intent to revoke shall contain a detailed statement of 
the grounds for the revocation and the time period allowed for the petitioner's rebuttal. 
The petitioner may submit evidence in rebuttal within 30 days of receipt of the notice. 
The director shall consider all relevant evidence presented in deciding whether to revoke 
the petition in whole or in part. If the petition is revoked in part. the remainder of the 
petition shall remain approved and a revised approval notice shall be sent to the 
petitioner with the revocation notice. 
The Director's statements in the NOIR regarding the evidence that the Beneficiary is not employed 
in a specialty occupation consistent with the terms and conditions of the approved H-1 B petition 
were adequate to notify the Petitioner of the intent to revoke the approval of the petition in 
accordance with the provision at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(ll )(iii)(A)(J). 
As will be evident in the discussion below, we find that. tully considered in the context ofthe entire 
record of proceedings. the Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary is involved in primarily 
specialty occupation job duties within the petitioning company. The documents submitted in 
response to the NOIR and on appeal tail to effectively rebut and overcome the basis for revocation 
specified. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. 
II. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION 
A. Law 
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) A baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry into the particular position: 
2 
Matter t~f T-, Inc. 
(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 perf()fmed only by an 
individual with a degree: 
(3) The employer normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the position: or 
( -1) 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). USCIS has consistently interpreted the term .. degree" in the criteria 
at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) 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 ( 'm]J. r. ( 'hertojf; 
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"): Defensor r. i\1/eissner. 
201 F.3d 384. 387 (5th Cir. 2000). 
B. The Proffered Position 
In the H-1 B petition. the Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary will serve as an .. accounting and 
financial analyst... In response to the Director's NOIR. the Petitioner provided the following job 
duties for the position. along with the approximate percentage of time the Beneficiary will spend on 
each duty: 
• Oversee daily accounting activities required to maintain the Authority's general 
ledger- Creating/Classifying/ Analyzing accounts & transactions. 10% 
• Manage check runs for accounts payable & recording of revenue and expenses. 
5% 
• *Prepare complex invoices to customers on a monthly basis and manage accounts 
receivables. 15%* 
• Organize records and files to document financial transactions. customer and 
vendor contracts. and state and government papers for bookkeeping & audit 
purposes. 1 0% 
• Review online bank statements and perform accounts reconciliations for checking 
accounts and corporate credit card accounts. 10% 
• Check credit card accounts for accuracy of expense postings and maintain 
records. 5% 
• *Analyze financial performance to provide P&L/Balance Sheet reporting for 
executive review. 10%* 
• *Perform cost & profitability analysis at company level and at a customer level. 
10%* 
3 
Matter 4 T-, Inc. 
• Assist in the payroll runs. state and federal registrations for tax preparation. 5% 
• *Create Auditing procedures and develop reconciliation processes. data files and 
reports and accrual management activities for checking accounts and corporate 
credit card accounts. 10%* 
• Manage Purchase orders/amendments. contracts. billing and payment 
documentation to make sure for accuracy and discrepancies are resolved. 1 0% 
The Petitioner noted that the duties marked with an asterisk are duties which enable the Beneficiary 
to calculate and review its tax liability. The Petitioner also submitted an accounting/financial 
workt1ow chart and a payroll workt1ow chart to further detail the Beneficiary's tasks. 
On appeaL the Petitioner lists some of the key tasks the Beneficiary performs including: time 
tracking and reporting for clients' accounts: invoicing: establishment of [requests for purchases] 
purchase orders: developing statements of work for new and existing clients: daily review of 
outstanding accounts receivable. aging analysis and follow-up on collections: and participating in the 
review of existing client margins. providing specific details to show the Petitioner's current financial 
situation. 
According to the Petitioner. the position reqmres a bachelor's degree m accounting. finance. 
business administration. or related field. 
C. Analysis 
Upon review of the record in its totality and for the reasons set out below. \Ve determine that the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated that the profTered position satisfies any of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) and. therefore. qualities 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. 2 
As a preliminary matter. the Petitioner's claim that a bachelor's degree in business administration is 
a sufficient minimum requirement for entry into the proffered position is inadequate to establish that 
the proposed position qualifies as a specialty occupation. A petitioner must demonstrate that the 
profTered position requires a precise and specific course of study that relates directly and closely to 
the position in question. Since there must be a close correlation bet\veen the required specialized 
studies and the position. the requirement of a degree \Vith a generalized title. such as business. 
without further specification. does not establish the position as a specialty occupation. Cf',\4aller of 
Michael Hertz Assoc.\' .. 19 I&N Dec. 558. 560 (Comm ·r 1988): Royal Siam CoJ]J. r. Chert off: 484 
F.3d at 147.3 
1 Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap. we will address each of the criteria individually. 
2 The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H-1 8 petition. including evidence regarding the proffered 
position. While we may not discuss every document submitted. we have reviewed and considered each one. 
' Specifically. the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit explained in Royal Siam that: 
4 
Afatter (?f T-, Inc. 
The Petitioner in this matter claims that the duties of the proffered position can be performed by an 
individual with only a general-purpose bachelor's degree. i.e., a bachelor's degree in business 
administration. Without more, this assertion alone indicates that the profTered position is not in fact 
a specialty occupation. 4 
1. First Criterion 
Nevertheless. for the purpose of performing a comprehensive analysis of whether the proffered 
position qualities as a specialty occupation. we now turn 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 patiicular position. To 
inform this inquiry, we recognize DOL's Occupalional Owlook Handbook (Handbook) as an 
authoritative source on the duties and educational requirements of the \Vide variety of occupations 
that it addresses. 5 
On the labor condition application (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 code 13-2011 at a Level I wage.
11 
The 
!d. 
The courts and the agency consistently have stated that, although a general-purpose bachelor's degree. 
such as a business administration degree. may be a legitimate prerequisite for a particular position. 
requiring such a degree, without more, \viii not justify the granting of a petition for an H-1 B specialty 
occupation visa. See. e.g. Tapis lnt'l r. INS. 94 F.Supp.2d 172. 175-76 (D. Mass. 2000): Slumti. 36 F. 
Supp. 2d at 1164-66: cf Matter ofAfichael Hert;; Assoc.\·., 19 I & &N Dec. 558.560 ([Comm'rl 1988) 
(providing frequently cited analysis in connection with a conceptually similar provision). This is as it 
should be: elsewisc. an employer could ensure the granting of a specialty occupation visa petition by 
the simple expedient of creating a generic (and essentially artificial) degree requirement. 
~ A general degree requirement does not necessarily preclude a proffered position from qualifying as a specialty 
occupation. For example. an entry requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in business administration \\ ith a 
concentration in a specific field. or a bachelor's or higher degree in business administration combined with relevant 
education. training. andlor experience may. in certain instances, qualit)' the proffered position as a specialty 
occupation. In either case. it must be demonstrated that the entry requirement is equivalent to a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proffered position. See Royal ·"''iam Corp. r. Cherto(j; 484 F.3d 
at 147. 
5 All of our references are to the 2016-2017 edition of the Handbook. which may be accessed at the Internet site 
http://www.bls.govloohl. We do not. however. maintain that the Handbook is the exclusive source of relevant 
information. That is. the occupational category designated by the Petitioner is considered as an aspect in establishing the 
general tasks and responsibilities of a proffered position, and USC IS regularly reviews the Handbook on the duties and 
educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses. To satisfy the first criterion. however. the 
burden of proof remains on the Petitioner to submit sufficient evidence to support a finding that its particular position 
would normally have a minimum. specialty degree requirement, or its equivalent. tor entry. 
<• We will consider the Petitioner's classification of the proffered position at a Level I wage (the lowest of tour assignable 
wage levels) in our analysis of the position. The "Prevailing Wage Detennination Policy Guidance·· issued by the DOL 
5 
Matter (~f T-, Inc. 
Director, however, concluded that the proffered posttlon should have been classified under the 
occupational category .. Bookkeeping, Accounting, or Auditing Clcrks:' 7 According to the 
Handbook, employers generally require some postsecondary education for these jobs. although a 
high school diploma may be sufticient. 8 Thus. the Handbook does not support that these jobs require 
the educational background, or its equivalent. commensurate with a specialty occupation 
Even assuming. arguendo. that the proffered position is an accountant position. the I landbook states 
that .. [i]n 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:· Thus. 
according to the Handbook. the occupation accommodates several paths for entry, including less 
than a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. 9 
On appeaL the Petitioner submits a printout of the O*NET OnLine Summary Report f()r 
··Accountants and Auditors." The summary repoti provides general information regarding the 
occupation: however, it does not support the Petitioner's assertion regarding the educational 
requirements for the occupation. For example. the Specialized Vocational Preparation (SVP) rating 
cited within O*NET's Job Zone designates this occupation as 7 < 8. 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 docs not describe how those years are to be divided 
among training. formal education, and experience - and it does not specify the particular type of 
degree, if any. that a position would require. 10 
provides a description of the wage levels. A Level I wage rate is generally appropriate for positions for which the 
Petitioner expects the Beneficiary to have a basic understanding of the occupation. This wage rate indicates: (I) that the 
Beneficiary will be expected to perform routine tasks that require limited. if any. exercise of judgment: (2) that she \\ill 
be closely supervised and her work closely monitored and reviewed for accuracy: and (3) that she will receive specific 
instructions on required tasks and expected results. U.S. Dep"t of Labor. Emp"t & Training Admin .. Prerai/ing Wage 
Determination Policy Guidance. Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009). available at 
http:i/llcdatacenter.com 1download/NPWHC_ Guidance. Revised _II_ 2009.pdf 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. /d. A Level I wage should be considered for research fellows. worker::. 
in training. or internships. !d. 
7 For additional information regarding this occupational category. see U.S. Dep"t of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 
Occupational Outlook Handhook, 2016-17 ed .. Accountants and Auditors, available at http:i/www.bls.gov 
1
0oh /office­
and-administrative-supportlprintlbookkeeping-accounting-and-auditing-clerks.htm# (last visited May 16. 2016 ). 
8 For additional information regarding this occupational category, see U.S. Dep"t of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 
Occupational Outlook Handhook, 2016-17 ed .. Accountants and Auditors, available at http://www.bls.gov'ooh,business­
and- financial 1print/accountants-and-auditors.htm (last visited May 16, 20 16). 
9 
The Handhook further states: "'Certification within a specific field of accounting improves job prospects." The 
Handhook reports that certification may be advantageous or even required for some accountant positions. However. we 
note that there is no indication that the Petitioner requires the Beneficiary to have obtained the designation CPA. 
Certified Management Accountant (CMA) or any other professional designation to serve in the proffered position. 
1° For additional information. see the O*NET Online Help webpage available at 
http://www.onetonline.org 1help/online/svp. 
Matter 4 T-, Inc. 
Further. the summary report provides the educational requirements of .. respondents:· but does not 
account for 100% of the .. respondents." The respondents· positions within the occupation are not 
distinguished by career level (e.g .. entry-level. mid-level. senior-level). Additionally. the graph in 
the summary report does not indicate that the .. education level" for the respondents must be in a 
specific specialty. 
Thus. the Petitioner has not provided documentation from a probative source to substantiate its 
assertion regarding the minimum requirement for entry into this particular position. Thus. the 
Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). 
2. 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 alternatire. 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[.l"" 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong 
contemplates the common industry practice. while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the 
Petitioner" s specific position. 
a. 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. 
In determining whether there is such a common degree requirement. factors often considered by 
USCIS include: 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 attest that such firms .. routinely employ 
and recruit only degreed individuals." ,)'ee Shanti. Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151. 1165 (D. Minn. 
1999) (quoting Jlird;B/aker Corp. r. Sam. 712 F. Supp. 1095. 1102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). 
As previously discussed. the Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one for which 
the Handbook. or other authoritative source. reports a requirement for at least a bachelor· s degree in 
a specific specialty. or its equivalent. Thus. we incorporate by reference the previous discussion on 
the matter. Also. there are no submissions from the industry's professional association indicating 
that it has made a degree a minimum entry requirement. Furthermore. the Petitioner did not submit 
any letters or affidavits from similar firms or individuals in the Petitioner's industry attesting that 
such firn1s '·routinely employ and recruit only de greed individuals ... 
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 
(b)(6)
Matter ofT-, Inc. 
announcements is misplaced. First, we note that some of the job postings do not appear to involve 
organizations similar to the Petitioner. For example, the Petitioner is a two-person law titm, \vhereas 
the advertising organizations include: 
• -a compan y that specializes in renovation and services for 
residential and commercial real estate : 
• -
a compan y in the fashion and media business ; and 
• -a company in the aluminum manufacturing industry. 
Furthermore, some of the postings appear to be for staffing agencies and/or provide little or no 
information regarding the hiring employers. The Petitioner did not supplement the record of 
proceeding to establish that the advertising organi zations are similar to it. 
When determining whether the Petition er and the organization share the same general 
characteristics , 
such factors may includ e infotm ation regarding the nature or type of organization. 
and, when pet1inent. the pat1icular scope of operations. as well as the level of revenue and starting 
(to list just a few elements that may be considered). It is not sufficient for the Petitioner to claim that 
an organization is s imilar and in the same industry without providing a legitimate basis for such an 
assertion. 
Moreover , many of the advertisements do not appear to be for parallel position s. For exampl e, some 
of the positions appear to be for more senior positions than the proffered position. Moreover. some 
of the postings do not include the duties and responsibilities for the advet1ised positions . Thus. it is 
not possible to determine important aspects of the jobs , such as the day-to-day respon sibilities. 
complexit y of the job duties. supervisory duties (if any). independent jud gment required or the 
amount of supervision received. Therefore, the Petitioner has not sufficientl y established that the 
primary duties and responsibilities of the advertised positions are parallel to the proffered position. 
In addition, some of the postings do not indicate that at least a bachelor's degree in a directly related 
specific specialty (or its equivalent) is required. 11 The job postings suggest. at best, that althou gh a 
bachelor's degree is sometimes required for budget analyst positions. a bachelor"s degree in a 
spec{fic specialt y (or its equivalent) is not. 12 
11 As discussed , the degree requirement set by the statutory and regulatory framework of the H-1 B program is not just a 
bachelor' s or higher d egree, but a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the duties of the 
position. See section 2 14(i)(l )(b) of the Act and 8 C.F .R. * 214.2(h)(4)(ii). Fu11her. although a gener al-purp ose 
bachelor's degree , such as a degree in business admini stration. may be a legitimat e prerequisite for a particul ar position, 
requiring such a degree, without more, will not justify a finding that a particular position qualities for classification as a 
specialty occupation . Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff; 484 F.3d at 147. 
12 It must be noted that even if all of the job posting s indicat ed that a requirement of a b achelor' s degree in a specific 
specialt y is common to th e indu stry in parallel positions amon g s imilar organization s (which they do not), the Pet itioner 
has not demonstrated what statisticall y valid inferenc es. if any. can be drawn trom the advertisement s with regar d to 
detenninin g the common educational requir ements tor entry into parallel position s in similar organizations. See 
genera/~1 · Earl Babbie , The Practice (!(Social Research 186-228 ( 1995). Moreo ver. given that there is no indication that 
the advertisements were randomly selected. the validity of any such inferences could not be accurately determin ed eve n 
8 
Matter ofT-. Inc. 
As the 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. 13 That is. not every deficit of every job posting has been addressed. Thus. the Petitioner 
has not satisfied the first alternative prong of8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
b. 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. 
We reviewed the Petitioner's statements regarding the proffered position: however. in the appeal 
brief: the Petitioner does not assert that it satisfies this prong of the second criterion. Further. the 
Petitioner has not sutliciently developed relative complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the 
profTered position. Thus. the Petitioner has not satisfied the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
3. Third Criterion 
The third criterion of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A) entails an employer demonstrating that it 
normally requires a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent. for the position. 
On appeal. the Petitioner references an individual it hired in the position of operations coordinator to 
support the Beneficiary's role as its accountant. 14 Although the Petitioner refers to the employment 
of this individual when discussing this criterion. it is not clear the significance of this employment in 
establishing that the Petitioner requires a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty. or its 
equivalent. for the proffered position. That is, it does not appear that the Petitioner hired this 
individual to perforn1 the duties of the profTered position but rather to support the individual 
employed in the pro1Jered position. 
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"). 
13 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. 
1
~ The Petitioner"s addition of this individual to its staff almost three years subsequent to the filing of the petition is not 
relevant to the current proceeding as this inf()fmation does not establish eligibility vvhen the petition was tiled. The 
Petitioner must establish eligibility at the time of filing the nonimmigrant visa petition and must continue to be eligible 
for the benefit through adjudication. 8 C.F.R. ~ 103.2(b)(l). A visa petition may not be approved at a future date after 
the Petitioner or Beneficiary becomes eligible under a new set of facts. See ,\fatter r?lAfichelin Tire Corp .. 17 I&N Dec. 
248.249 (Reg'! Comm·r 1978). 
9 
Matter ofT-, Inc. 
Without more, the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to establish that it normally 
requires at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent. for the proffered 
position. Therefore. it has not satisfied the third criterion of8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
4. Fourth Criterion 
The fourth criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) requires a petitioner to establish that the nature 
of the specific duties is so specialized and complex that the knov.:ledge required to perform them is 
usually associated with the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty. or 
its equivalent. 
In support of this criterion, the Petitioner provided descriptions of the duties of the proffered position 
and information regarding its business operations. In addition. the Petitioner submits samples of the 
Beneficiary's work and emails between the Beneficiary and its vendors. The Petitioner claims that 
.. the duties performed are high level duties requiring an education at the baccalaureate level.·· 
However, contrary to the Petitioner's assertion that the position includes .. high level duties:· the 
Petitioner designated the proffered position on the LCA as a Level I wage level.'~ As discussed 
earlier. this designation indicates that the proffered position is a low-leveL entry position relative to 
others within the ··Accountants and Auditors" occupational category. 16 
While the Petitioner may believe that the proffered position meets this criterion of the regulations. it 
has not sufficiently demonstrated how the position as described requires the theoretical and practical 
application of a body of highly specialized knowledge and the attainment of a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent. For instance. the Petitioner did not submit 
information relevant to a detailed course of study leading to a specialty degree and did not establish 
how such a curriculum is necessary to perform the tasks. While a few related courses may be 
beneficial in performing certain duties of the position, the Petitioner has not demonstrated ho\v an 
established curriculum of such courses is required. The evidence in the record does not refute the 
Handbook's infonnation to the effect that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. or its 
equivalent, is not required for entry into the occupation in the United States. Without more. the 
15 The Petitioner's designation of this position as a Level I, entry-level position undermines its claim that the position is 
particularly complex compared to other positions ll'ithin the same occupation. Nevertheless. a Level I wage-designation 
does not preclude a proffered position !rom classification as a specialty occupation. just as a Level IV wage-designation 
does not definitively establish such a classification. In certain occupations (e.g .. doctors or lawyers). a Level I. entry­
level position would still require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. for 
entry. Similarly, however. a Level IV wage-designation would not rellect that an occupation qualities as a specialty 
occupation if that higher-level position does not have an entry requirement of at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty, or its equivalent. That is. a position's wage level designation may be a relevant factor but is not itself 
conclusive evidence that a proffered position meets the requirements of section 214(i)( I) of the Act. 
1" A Level IV (fully competent) position is designated by DOL for employees \\ho .. use advanced skills and diversified 
knowledge to solve unusual and complex problems" and requires a significantly higher wage. For additional information 
regarding wage levels as delined by DOL, see U.S. Dep't of Labor. Emp't & Training Admin .. Premi/ing Wage 
Delamination Polh:l· Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http: 
1
;\vww.foreignlaborcert.doleta.govlpdf!NPWHC ~Guidance_ Revised II . 2009.pdf 
10 
Matter ofT-. Inc. 
record lacks sufficiently detailed infonnation to distinguish the level of judgment and understanding 
necessary to perform the duties as specialized and complex. 
In addition. the Petitioner 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 has not 
demonstrated in the record that its proffered position is one with duties sufficiently specialized and 
complex to satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(.J). 
D. Conclusion 
Because the Petitioner has not satisfied one ofthe criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). it has not 
demonstrated that the proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation. The burden is on the 
Petitioner to show eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act. 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1361: Matter (~(Otiende. 26 I&N Dec. 127. 128 (BIA 2013 ). I lere. that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter (?fT-. Inc .. ID# 16718 (AAO June L 2016) 
11