dismissed H-1B Case: Agriculture

idPatiiying data deleted to 
event clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal priv~y 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: SRC 05 001 50520 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: JUN 2 9 2006 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary 
PETITION: 
 Petition for a Nonirnrnigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1 lOl(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. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
SRC 05 001 50520 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director 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 farm that seeks to employ the beneficiary as a farm manager. The petitioner endeavors to 
classify the beneficiary as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to 9 IOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) 
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1 10 1 (a)(] 5)(H)(i)(b). 
The director denied the petition because the beneficiary is not qualified to perform the duties of a specialty 
occupation. On appeal, counsel submits a letter. 
Section 214(i)(2) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 11 84(i)(2), states that an alien applying for classification as an H-1B 
nonimmigrant worker must possess full state licensure to practice in the occupation, if such licensure is 
required to practice in the occupation, and completion of the degree in the specialty that the occupation 
requires. If the alien does not possess the required degree, the petitioner must demonstrate that the alien has 
experience in the specialty equivalent to the completion of such degree, and recognition of expertise in the 
specialty through progressively responsible positions relating to the specialty. 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C), to qualify to perform services in a specialty occupation, an alien 
must meet one of the following criteria: 
(I) 
 Hold a United States baccalaureate or higher degree required by the specialty 
occupation from an accredited college or university; 
(2) 
 Hold a foreign degree determined to be equivalent to a United States baccalaureate or 
higher degree required by the specialty occupation from an accredited college or 
university; 
(3) 
 Hold an unrestricted state license, registration or certification which authorizes him 
or her to fully practice the specialty occupation and be immediately engaged in that 
specialty in the state of intended employment; or 
(4) 
 Have education, specialized training, and/or progressively responsible experience 
that is equivalent to completion of a United States baccalaureate or higher degree in 
the specialty occupation, and have recognition of expertise in the specialty through 
progressively responsible positions directly related to the specialty. 
The record of proceeding before the AAO contains, in part: (1) Form 1-129 and supporting documentation; 
(2) the director's request for additional evidence; (3) the petitioner's response to the director's request; (4) the 
director's denial letter; and (5) Form I-290B and supporting documentation. The AAO reviewed the record in 
its entirety before issuing its decision. 
The petitioner is seeking the beneficiary's services as a farm manager. The petitioner indicated in its 
September 15, 2004 letter that a qualified candidate for the job would possess a bachelor's degree in 
agriculture, animal science, or an equivalent thereof. 
SRC 05 001 50520 
Page 3 
The director found that the beneficiary was not qualified for the proffered position because the beneficiary's 
experience and training were not equivalent to a baccalaureate degree in a specialty required by the 
occupation. On appeal, counsel states that the record contains an evaluation from a professor at the University 
of Tennessee as evidence that the beneficiary is qualified for the position. Counsel states further that the 
University of Tennessee is an accredited university with a program for granting credit based on an 
individual's training and/or work experience, that the professor has authority to grant college-level credit for 
training and/or experience, and that the professor's evaluations have been accepted previously by the director. 
Upon review of the record, the petitioner has failed to establish that the beneficiary is qualified to perform an 
occupation that requires a baccalaureate degree in a computer-related field. The beneficiary does not hold a 
baccalaureate degree from an accredited U.S. college or university in any field of study, or a foreign degree 
determined to be equivalent to a baccalaureate degree from a U.S. college or university in any field of study. 
Therefore, the petitioner must demonstrate that the beneficiary meets the criterion at 
8 C.F.R. 8 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C)(4). 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D), equating the beneficiary's credentials to a United States 
baccalaureate or higher degree shall be determined by one or more of the following: 
(I) An evaluation from an official who has authority to grant college-level credit for training 
and/or experience in the specialty at an accredited college or university which has a program 
for granting such credit based on an individual's training and/or work experience; 
(2) The results of recognized college-level equivalency examinations or special credit programs, 
such as the College Level Examination Program (CLEP), or Program on Noncollegiate 
Sponsored Instruction (PONSI); 
(3) An evaluation of education by a reliable credentials evaluation service which specializes in 
evaluating foreign educational credentials; 
(4) Evidence of certification or registration from a nationally-recognized professional association 
or society for the specialty that is known to grant certification or registration to persons in the 
occupational specialty who have achieved a certain level of competence in the specialty; 
(5) A determination by the Service that the equivalent of the degree required by the specialty 
occupation has been acquired through a combination of education, specialized training, 
and/or work experience in areas related to the specialty and that the alien has achieved 
recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation as a result of such training and 
experience. 
The record contains an evaluation from a professor at the University of Tennessee, who concludes that, based 
on his educational background and life experiences, the beneficiary possesses the equivalent of a Bachelor of 
Science degree in agricultural sciences and natural resources with a major in animal science and a 
concentration in production/business. A review of the "Information Provided" portion of this evaluation 
indicates that the evaluator bases his conclusion on the following documents pertaining to the beneficiary's 
background: a certificate of graduation (and translation) from a high school in Mexico, and a resume. As 
such, it appears that the evaluator's conclusion was based primarily on the uncorroborated assertions in the 
SRC 05 001 50520 
Page 4 
beneficiary's resume, such as growing up on a family farm, participating in all aspects of farm management, 
and owning and operating a farm in Mexico. It is also noted that the record does not contain evidence that the 
University of Tennessee is an accredited university with a program for granting credit based on an 
individual's training and/or work experience, and that the professor/evaluator has authority to grant 
college-level credit for training and/or experience, such as a letter from the university provost. CIS 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 is not required to accept or may give 
less weight to that evidence. Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791 (Comm. 1988). Counsel's 
assertions on appeal that the University of Tennessee is an accredited university with a program for granting 
credit based on an individual's training and/or work experience, and that the professor/evaluator has authority 
to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience, are noted. Again, the record contains no evidence 
in support of his assertions, such as a statement from the university provost. Without documentary evidence to 
support the claim, the assertions of counsel will not satisfy the petitioner's burden of proof. The unsupported 
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 1983); Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. 503, 506 (BIA 
1980). 
When CIS determines an alien's qualifications pursuant to 8 C.F.R. fj 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5), three years of 
specialized training and/or work experience must be demonstrated for each year of college-level training the 
alien lacks. It must be clearly demonstrated that the alien's training and/or work experience included the 
theoretical and practical application of specialized knowledge required by the specialty occupation; that the 
alien's experience was gained while worlung with peers, supervisors, or subordinates who have a degree or its 
equivalent in the specialty occupation; and that the alien has recognition of expertise in the specialty 
evidenced by at least one type of documentation such as: 
(i) 
 Recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation by at least two recognized 
authorities in the same specialty occupation1; 
(ii) 
 Membership in a recognized foreign or United States association or society in the 
specialty occupation; 
(iii) 
 Published material by or about the alien in professional publications, trade journals, 
books, or major newspapers; 
(iv) 
 Licensure or registration to practice the specialty occupation in a foreign country; or 
(v) 
 Achievements which a recognized authority has determined to be significant 
contributions to the field of the specialty occupation. 
1 
 Recognized authority means a person or organization with expertise in a particular field, special skills or 
knowledge in that field, and the expertise to render the type of opinion requested. A recognized authority's 
opinion must state: (1) the writer's qualifications as an expert; (2) the writer's experience giving such 
opinions, citing specific instances where past opinions have been accepted as authoritative and by whom; 
(3) how the conclusions were reached; and (4) the basis for the conclusions supported by copies or citations of 
any research material used. 8 C.F.R. fj 214.2(h)(4)(ii). 
SRC 05 001 50520 
Page 5 
The record contains evidence that the beneficiary graduated from a Mexican high school. Although the 
beneficiary describes his employment experience on his resume, the record contains no documentation, such 
as evidence of the beneficiary's farm ownership and management, and employment letters from the 
beneficiary's employers, as corroborating evidence. The evidence of record does not establish equivalence to 
a baccalaureate degree in agriculture or a related field. Going on record without supporting documentary 
evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of 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 AAO now turns to the beneficiary's prior work experience, and whether it included the theoretical and 
practical application of specialized knowledge required by the specialty. As discussed above, the record 
contains no corroborating evidence in support of the employment experience described on the beneficiary's 
resume. Thus, the AAO cannot conclude that the beneficiary's past work experience included the theoretical 
and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, which in this case is farm management. 
Furthermore, the record contains no evidence of the recognition of expertise required by 
8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5). 
In short, the record provides no basis for disturbing the director's decision. The petitioner failed to establish 
that the beneficiary is qualified to perform services in a specialty occupation according to the standards of 
8 C.F.R. $9 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C) and (D). 
As related in the discussion above, the petitioner has failed to establish that the beneficiary is qualified to 
perform the duties of the proffered position. 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.