dismissed H-1B Case: Business Analysis

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 9896828 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : OCT . 6, 2020 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a "business analyst" under the H-lB 
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-lB 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 of the Vermont Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not establish 
that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief and 
contends that the petition should be approved. 
It is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit by a preponderance of the 
evidence. 1 We review the questions in this matter de novo.2 Upon de nova review , we will sustain 
the appeal. 
Though the Petitioner did not provide the practice group within which the Beneficiary would work, it 
did provide descriptions of projects upon which she could work, and they align with the requirements 
for the position. For example, the Petitioner described a project that would entail the Beneficiary 
working with "an engineering and construction giant [to] reignite profitable growth ." Another project 
would involve the Beneficiary working on a project during which she would analyze an urban 
transportation system. Another would require the Beneficiary to help an energy company better plan 
the way in which it plans capital projects . The record contains an advisory opinion stating that the 
proffered position requires a bachelor's degree in engineering management or a related field , and we 
find that a preponderance of the evidence supports that conclusion. When reviewed within the context 
of the Petitioner's business operations, we find the evidence of record sufficient to demonstrate that 
this Beneficiary's work would in fact involve a "body of highly specialized knowledge" attained 
through a precise and specific course of study that relates directly and closely to the proffered position. 
1 See Section 291 of the Act; see also Matter ofChawath e, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). 
2 See Matter of Christo 's Inc ., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015) . 
The evidence of record therefore establishes that the proffered position requires the theoretical and 
practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and the attainment of a bachelor's or 
higher degree in the specific specialty or its equivalent. It qualifies for classification as a specialty 
occupation as the term is defined at section 214(i)(l) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). It also 
establishes that the position is so complex or unique that it can only be performed by an individual with a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or the equivalent, and it therefore also satisfies 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). The record demonstrates that the Beneficiary possesses a U.S. master's degree in 
engineering management, so she is qualified to perform the duties of this specialty occupation. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
2