dismissed H-1B Case: Aviation Consulting

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF APA-M-C-, LLC 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: FEB. 15,2017 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, an aviation consulting firm, seeks to continue its employment of the Beneficiary as a 
"finance director" under the H -1 B nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). 
The H-IB program allows a U.S. employer to temporarily employ a qualified foreign worker in a 
position that requires both (a) the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge and (b) the attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its 
equivalent) as a minimum prerequisite for entry into the position. 
The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and 
asserts that the evidence of record satisfies all evidentiary requirements. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
Section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1184(i)(l), defines the term "specialty occupation" as an 
occupation that requires: 
(A) theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge, and 
(B) attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its 
equivalent) as a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) largely restates this statutory definition, but adds a non­
exhaustive list of fields of e~deavor. In addition, the regulations provide that the proffered position 
must meet one of the following criteria to qualify as a specialty occupation: 
Matter of APA-M-C-, LLC 
(1) A baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry into the particular position; 
(2) The degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among 
similar organizations or, in the alternative, an employer may show that its 
particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an 
individual with a degree; 
(3) The employer normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the position; or 
( 4) The nature of the specific duties [is] so specialized and complex that 
knowledge required to perform the duties is usually associated with the 
attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (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 
p~sition. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Cherto.ff, 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 v. Meissner, 201 F.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). 
II. PROFFERED POSITION 
In the H-1 B petition, the Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary will serve as a "finance director." The 
Petitioner provided the following description of the duties of the proffered position: 
In regards to Planning and Development, the Finance Director will: 
);> Take responsibility for overall management and delivery of the business plan; 
);> In conjunction with the governing body, draft, monitor and assess the business 
and development plan; and 
);> Assess options for coordinating the activities, procedures and systems so as to 
promote common policies and practices. 
In regards to Supporting the Governing Body, the Finance Director will: 
);> Advise the governing body on financial, managerial, staffing and service 
delivery issues; 
);> Report to the governing body on progress against agreed objectives; and 
);> Prepare and draft the affiliated group companies' annual report. 
2 
Matter of APA-M-C-, LLC 
In regards to Financial Management, the Finance Director will: 
? Maintain day-to-day financial control of the service within budget heads 
agreed by the governing body; 
? Ensure that all finances are properly administered and monitored, including 
credit control; 
? Make regular reports to governing body on income, expenditure and any 
variations from budgets; 
? Ensure that all financial reporting obligations are met in relation to 
submissions; and 
? Review all work prepared by contracting accountants. 
In regards to staff management, the Finance Director will: 
? Ensure, delegating as appropriate, that each service location is adequately 
managed, staffed and resourced; and 
? Overview policies and procedures, employment and contractor agreements. 
As to the educational requirement of the proffered position, the Petitioner stated: "We require 
candidates to have at least a Bachelor's degree in Business Administration." 
III. ANALYSIS 
Upon review of the record in its totality and for the reasons set out below, we determine that the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 1 
Specifically, the record does not establish that the job duties require an educational background, or 
its equivalent, commensurate with a specialty occupation? 
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 
proffered 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 between the required specialized 
studies and the position, the requirement of a degree with a generalized title, such as business 
administration, without further specification, does not establish the position as a specialty 
occupation. Cf Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. 558, 560 (Comm'r 1988). 
To prove that a job requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
1 
Although some aspects ofthe regulatory criteria may overlap,' we will address each of the criteria individually. 
, 
2 
The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H-1 B petition, including evidence regarding the proffered 
position and its business operations. While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and 
considered each one. 
3 
Matter of APA-M-C-, LLC 
knowledge as required by section 214(i)( 1) of the Act, a petitioner must establish that the position 
requires the attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specialized field of study or its 
equivalent. As discussed supra, USCIS interprets the degree requirement at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to require a degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proposed 
position. Although a general-purpose bachelor's degree, such as a degree in business administration, 
may be a legitimate prerequisite for a particular position, requiring such a degree, without more, will 
not justify a finding that a particular position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. 
Royal Siam Corp., 484 F.3d at 147.3 
Again, 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 proffered position is not in fact 
a specialty occupation. 
Moreover, it also cannot be found that the proffered position is a specialty occupation because the 
Petitioner has not satisfied any of the supplemental, additional criteria at 8 C.F .R. 
§ 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A). 
A. First Criterion 
We tum first to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(J), which requires that a baccalaureate 
or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for 
entry into the particular position. To inform this inquiry, we recognize the U.S. Department of Labor's 
(DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) as an authoritative source on the duties and 
educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses.4 
3 Specifically, the judge explained in Royal Siam, 484 F.3d at 147, that: 
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, will not justify the granting of a petition for an H-1 B specialty 
occupation visa. See, e.g., Tapis lnt'lv. INS, 94 F.Supp.2d 172, 175-76 (D. Mass. 2000); Shanti, 36 F. 
Supp. 2d at 1164-66; cf Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I & &N Dec. 558, 560 ([Comm'r] 1988) 
(providing frequently cited analysis in connection with a conceptually similar provision). This is as it 
should be: elsewise, 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. 
4 All of our references are to the 2016-2017 edition of the Handbook, which. may be accessed at the Internet site 
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/. 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, for entry. 
4 
Matter of APA-M-C-, LLC 
On the labor condition application (LCA)5 submitted in support of the H-1B petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the occupational category "Financial Managers" 
corresponding to the Standard Occupational Classification code 11-3031.6 The Handbook states the 
following about the educational requirements of positions located within this occupational category: 
A bachelor's degree in finance, accounting, economics, or business administration is 
often the minimum education needed for financial managers. However, many 
employers now seek candidates with a master's degree, preferably in business 
administration, finance, or economics. These academic programs help students 
develop analytical skills and learn financial analysis methods and software. 
U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2016-17 ed., 
"Financial Managers," http://www. bls.gov/ooh/management/financial-managers.htm#tab-4, (last 
visited Feb. 13, 2017). 
The Handbook states that a bachelor's degree in business administration, without further 
specialization, would provide sufficient educational preparation for a financial manager position. 
However, a petitioner must demonstrate that the proffered position requires a precise and specific 
course of study that relates directly and closely to the position in question. Again, since there must 
be a close correlation between the required specialized studies and the position, the requirement of a 
degree with a generalized title, such as business administration, without further specification, does 
not establish the position as a specialty occupation. Cf Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. at 560. 
Although a general-purpose bachelor's degree, such as a degree in business administration, may be a 
legitimate prerequisite for a particular position, requiring such a degree, without more, will not 
justify a finding that a particular position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. Royal 
Siam Corp., 484 F.3d at 147. 
To establish that the proffered pos1t10n qualifies as a specialty occupation, the Petitioner also 
submitted information from the O*NET and Standard Vocational Preparation (SVP) inforn1ation 
-\ 
5 The Petitioner is required to submit a certified LCA to USC IS 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 experience and qualifications who are performing the same 
services. See Matter ofSimeio Solutions, LLC, 26 I&N Dec. 542, 545-546 (AAO 20 15). 
6 The Petitioner classified the proffered position at a Level I wage (the lowest of four assignable wage levels). We will 
consider this selection in our analysis of the position. The "Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance" issued by 
the DOL provides a description of the wage levels. 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 he 
will be closely supervised and his work closely monitored and reviewed for accuracy; and (3) that he will receive 
specific instructions on required tasks and expected results. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing 
Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http://tlcdatacenter.com/download/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 ofthe Petitioner's job opportunity. !d. 
5 
Matter.of APA-M-C-, LLC 
submitted by the Petitioner. The O*NET Summary Report regarding certain financial manager 
positons does not state that these positions require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty, or the equivalent. Rather, it assigns this occupation a Job Zone "Four" rating, which 
groups it among occupations for which "most . ~ . require a four-year bachelor's degree, but some do 
not." O*NET OnLine Summary Report for "11-3031.01 - Treasures and Controllers," 
http://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/11-3031.01 (last visited Feb. 13, 2017). Further, O*NET 
. does not indicate that when a 4-year bachelor's degree is required, it must be in a specific specialty 
directly related to the occupation, or the equivalent. Nor is the occupation's SVP rating is not 
probative of the proffered position being a specialty occupation, as these ratings are meant to 
indicate only the total number of years of training required for a particular position, but do not 
describe how those years are to be divided among training, formal education, and experience, and do 
not specify the particular type of degree, if any, that a position would require. 7 
Finally, we observe that in designating the proffered position at a Level I wage, the Petitioner 
indicated that the proffered position is a comparatively low, entry-level position relative to others 
within the occupation. That is, in accordance with the relevant DOL explanatory information on 
wage levels, this wage rate indicates that the Beneficiary is only required to have a basic 
understanding of the occupation and carries expectations that the Beneficiary perform routine tasks 
that require limited, if any, exercise of judgment. Again, the Handbook does not establish that a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or the equivalent, is normally required for positions located 
within the occupational category designated by the Petitioner. If typical positions located within the 
occupational category do not require a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or the equivalent, 
then it is unclear how a position with the Level I characteristics described.above would. 
For all of these reasons, the Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(J). 
B. Second Criterion 
The second criterion presents two, alternative prongs: "The degree requirement is common to the 
industry in parallel positions among similar organizations or, in the alternative, an employer may 
show that its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an 
individual with a degree[.]" 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong 
casts its gaze upon the common industry practice, while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the 
Petitioner's specific position. 
7 For more information about SVP ratings, see O*NET Online Help Specific Vocational Preparation (SVP), 
https://www.onetonline.org/help/online/svp (last visited Feb. 13, 20 17). 
6 
Matter of APA-M-C-, LLC 
1. First Prong 
To satisfy this first prong of the second criterion, the Petitioner must establish that the "degree 
requirement" (i.e., a requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent) is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. 
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." See Shanti, Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151, 1165 (D. Minn. 1999) 
(quoting Hird/Blaker Corp. v. Sava, 712 F. Supp. 1095, 1102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). 
Here and as already discussed, we find that the Petitioner has not established that its proffered position 
is one for which the Handbook (or other independent, authoritative source) reports an industry-wide 
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 firms "routinely employ and recruit only 
de greed individuals." 
The record contains five job vacancy announcements advertising posttlons entitled "Director, 
Finance," and "Director of Finance and Accounting" for our consideration under this prong. We 
find none persuasive. 
One vacancy announcement advertises a position involving work with "the financial and insurance 
industries," and the remaining announcements provide little to no information regarding the 
industries in which the advertising companies conduct business. The entry requirements of positions 
that have not been shown to be in the Petitioner's industry are generally outside of the scope of 
analysis pertinent to this criterion. 
Further, two vacancy announcements indicate that an otherwise unspecified bachelor's .or master's 
degree in business administration would provide sufficient preparation. However, as explained 
above an educational requirement that may be satisfied by an otherwise unspecified degree in 
business administration is not a requirement for a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent. 
Another vacancy announcement states that a bachelor's degree is required for the position, and that a 
bachelor's degree in finance or accounting is preferred. However, a preference is not necessarily a 
normal minimum recruiting and hiring requirement, and the minimum stated educational 
requirement for the position is therefore an unspecified bachelor's degree. Again, a minimum 
7 
Matter of APA-M-C-, LLC 
requirement of an unspecified bachelor's degree is not a requirement for a minimum of a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. 
Further, although the Petitioner asserted that the proffered position is a wage Level 1, entry-level, 
position, every vacancy announcement requires work experience, and some require a considerable 
amount of experience. 8 As such, none of these vacancies appear to involve entry-level positions. 
Finally, even if all of the vacancy announcements involved parallel positions with organizations 
similar to the Petitioner, located within the Petitioner's industry, and also required a minimum of a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent, we would still find that the Petitioner had 
not demonstrated what statistically valid inferences, if any, could be drawn from five announcements 
with regard to the common educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar 
• . 9 ' 
orgamzat10ns. 
Thus, the evidence of record does not establish that a requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in 
a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common to parallel positions with organizations that are in 
the Petitioner's industry and otherwise similar to the Petitioner. The Petitioner has not, therefore, 
satisfied the criterion of the first alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A)(2). 
2. Second Prong 
We will next consider the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2), which is 
satisfied if the Petitioner shows that its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be 
performed only by an individual with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. 
A review of the record of proceedings finds that the Petitioner has not credibly demonstrated that the 
duties the Beneficiary will be responsible for or perform on a day-to-day basis constitute a position 
so complex or unique that it can only be performed by a person with at least a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent. Even if we consider the Petitioner's general descriptions of the 
proffered position's duties, the evidence of record still would not establish why a few related courses 
or industry experience alone would provide insufficient preparation for the proffered position. 
While a few related courses may be beneficial, or even required, in performing certain duties of the 
position, the Petitioner has not demonstrated how an established curriculum of such courses leading 
to a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is required to perform 
8 For example, one ofthe announcements states a requirement for "20+ years" of work experience. 
9 USClS "must examine each piece of evidence for relevance, probative value, and credibility, both individually and 
within the context of the totality of the evidence, to detem1ine whether the fact to be proven is probably true." Matter o{ 
Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 20 I 0). As just discussed, the Petitioner has not established the relevance oft he 
job advertisements submitted to the position proffered in this case. Even if their relevance had been established, the 
Petitioner still would not have demonstrated what inferences, if any, can be drawn from these few job postings with 
regard to determining the common educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations in 
the same industry. See generally Earl Babbie, The Practice of Social Research 186-228 ( 1995). 
8 
Matter of APA-M-C-, LLC 
the duties of the proffered position. The description of the duties does not specifically identify any 
tasks that are so complex or unique that only a specifically degreed individual could perform them. 
The record lacks sufficiently detailed information to distinguish the proffered position as more 
complex or unique from other positions that can be performed by persons without at least a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
This is further evidenced by the LCA submitted by the Petitioner in support of the instant 
petition. We acknowledge the Petitioner's statements regarding the leadership requirements of this 
position and the critical role the Beneficiary would occupy within its organization. But the 
Petitioner's Level I wage-level designation undercuts those assertions. As noted, a Level I wage is 
appropriate for a position which only requires a basic understanding of the occupation, and is 
contrary to a position that requires the performance of complex duties. 10 Therefore, the evidence of 
record does not establish that this position is significantly different from other positions in the 
occupation such that it refutes the Handbook's information to the effect that there is a spectrum of 
degrees acceptable for such positions, including degrees not in a specific specialty. In other words, 
if typical positions located within the occupational category do not require a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty, or the equivalent, then it is unclear how a position with the Level I characteristics 
described above would, regardless of the Petitioner's assertions.'' 
The Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary is well-qualified for the position, and references his 
qualifications. However, the test to establish a position as a specialty occupation is not the education 
or experience of a proposed beneficiary, but whether the position itself requires at least a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. The Petitioner did not sufficiently develop relative 
complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the duties of the position, and it did not identify any tasks 
that are so complex or unique that only a specifically degreed individual could perform them. 
Accordingly, the Petitioner has not satisfied the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A)(2). 
10 
The issue here is that the Petitioner's designation of this position as a Level I, entry-level position undermines its claim 
that the position is particularly complex, specialized, or unique compared to other positions within the same 
occupation. Nevertheless, it is important to note that a Level I wage-designation does not preclude a proffered position 
from classification as a specialty occupation. In certain occupations (doctors or lawyers, for example), an 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 reflect that an occupation qualifies as a specialty 
occupation if that higher-level position does not have an entry requirement of at least a bachelor's degree in a specitic 
specialty or its equivalent. That is, a position's wage level designation may be a consideration but is not a substitute for 
a determination of whether a proffered position meets the requirements of section 214(i)( I) of the Act. 
11 We observe that the Beneficiary appears to have been working for the Petitioner in the proffered position since 20 II. 
It is therefore unclear, particularly in light of the Petitioner's claims regarding the critical nature of the positon to its 
overall success, how the Beneficiary could still be performing the types of low-level duties characterized by a Level I 
wage-level designation. This raises questions as to whether the LCA corresponds to and supports the H-1 B petition. 
Because the proffered position is not a specialty occupation we will not explore this issue further, except to note that the 
Petitioner should be prepared to address it in any future filings. 
9 
Matter of APA-M-C-, LLC 
C. 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. 
The Petitioner stated that it was established in 2004 and that it has never accepted less than a 
bachelor's degree in business administration for the proffered position. However, the Petitioner did 
not identify any employees that it had previously employed in the proffered position or who had 
previously performed the duties of the proffered position. 12 It is unclear how an employer could 
satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3) without providing evidence pertinent to those who 
previously performed the duties of the proffered position. 
Further, the Petitioner has indicated that the educational requirement of the proffered position may 
be satisfied by an otherwise undifferentiated bachelor's degree in business administration. Again, an 
educational requirement that may be satisfied by an otherwise undifferentiated bachelor's degree in 
business administration is not a requirement of a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent. 
For both reasons, we cannot conclude that the Petitioner has satisfied the third criterion of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 13 
D. 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 knowledge required to perform them is 
usually associated with the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or 
its equivalent. 
We acknowledge the Petitioner's assertions regarding the specialization and complexity of the 
position's duties. However, as above, those claims are undermined by the Petitioner's Level I wage 
designation. Again, in classifying the proffered position at a Level I (entry-level) wage, the 
12 
The Petitioner did provide evidence pertinent to its requirements for other positions. However, the Petitioner's 
requirements for other positions are not directly relevant to our analysis ·under this criterion. Further, the Petitioner 
indicated that an otherwise unspecified bachelor's degree in business administration would be a sufficient educational 
qualification for those positions. 
13 While a petitioner may believe or otherwise assert that a proffered position requires a degree in a specific specialty, 
that opinion alone without corroborating evidence cannot establish the position as a specialty occupation. Were USCIS 
limited solely to reviewing a petitioner's claimed self-imposed requirements, then any individual with a bachelor's 
degree could be brought to the United States to perform any occupation as long as the employer artificially created a 
token degree requirement, whereby all individuals employed in a particular position possessed a baccalaureate or higher 
degree in the specific specialty or its equivalent. Defensor, 20 I F. 3d at 387. In other words, if a petitioner's degree 
requirement is only symbolic and the proffered position does not in fact require such a specialty degree or its equivalent 
to perform its duties, the occupation would not meet the statutory or regulatory definition of a specialty occupation. See 
seetion 214(i)( I) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) (defining the term "specialty occupation"). 
10 
' Matter C!f APA-M-C-, LLC 
Petitioner effectively attested to DOL that the Beneficiary would perform routine tasks that require 
limited, if any, exercise of judgment. 14 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)(4). 
Because the Petitioner has not satisfied one of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), it has not 
demonstrated that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 15 
IV. CONCLUSION 
The burden is on the Petitioner to show eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of APA-M-C-. LLC, ID# 183817 (AAO Feb. 15, 2017) 
14 Again, the Petitioner's designation of this position as a Level I, entry-level position undermines its claim that the 
position is particularly complex, specialized, or unique compared to other positions within the same occupation. 
15 Because this issue precludes approval of this petition we will not address any of the additional deficiencies we have 
observed in our de novo review. 
II