dismissed H-1B Case: Computer Consulting

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF D-S-, INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: APR. 19, 2017 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM l-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a computer consulting services company, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as an "MS BI Developer" 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-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 California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the offered position qualifies as a specialty occupation or that the Petitioner has 
sufficient work for the requested period of intended employment. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director erred and the petition should be approved. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal.
1 
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. 
1 
We follow the preponderance of the evidence standard as specified in Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 
(AAO 2010). 
~~~------
Matter of D-S-, Inc. 
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 proflered position 
must meet one of the following criteria to qualify as a specialty occupation: 
(I) 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). We have consistently interpreted 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. Cherto_f(, 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 
The Petitioner indicated that the Beneficiary will serve in the position of Microsoft business 
intelligence (MS BI) developer with the following duties (note: errors in the original have not been 
changed): 
• Assist on-site site consultants working at various client locations in MS Business 
Intelligence application. 
• Build prototypes/proof of concept for different functionalities in MS BJ software to 
meet the business requirements gathered by our on-site consultants working at 
various client locations. 
• Provide technical assistance in the area of MS BI best practices to other on-site 
consultants of [the Petitioner] who will be working at various client locations. 
• Train new associates/interns of [the Petitioner] in building their MS BI consulting 
skills. 
• Assist associates of [the Petitioner] in preparing documentation and presentation 
slides to bid for implementation work with different companies in the U.S. Respond 
to any queries addressed by the prospective clients. 
2 
Matter of D-S-, Inc. 
• Provide technical assistance related Reports, Interfaces, Conversions, Enhancements, 
Forms (RICEFs) in software consulting work performed by our on-site consultants 
working at various client locations. Assist on-site consultants in developing 
functional specifications for RICEF enhancements. 
• Test new releases of various Business Intelligence softwares in test systems and 
report the product defects to the on-site consultants. 
According to the Petitioner, the position requires a "U.S. or foreign bachelor's degree (or, 
sometimes, the equivalent through education and experience) in computer science, engineering, 
management information systems, or a closely related field," in addition to "one or more years of 
relevant experience in various IT systems and applications." 
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? 
Specifically, the Petitioner has not submitted sufficient, credible evidence to establish that the 
Beneficiary will be exclusively assigned in-house for the duration of the requested period of 
employment as claimed, or provided sufficient details about the work to be performed. 
As evident from the job description above, the Petitioner described the duties of the proffered position 
in relatively general terms. While the Petitioner indicated that the Beneficiary will support "on-site 
consultants working at various client locations," it did not provide specific, detailed information 
regarding the actual projects the on-site consultants are working on and to which the Beneficiary will be 
assigned to provide support. The job description lacks sufficient detail to establish the substantive 
nature of the work within the context of any project(s) the Beneficiary will work on, and the associated 
applications of specialized knowledge that their actual performance would require. 
For example, the Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary will "[a]ssist on-site site consultants working 
at various client locations in MS Business Intelligence application," but did not clarify what js meant 
by the broad term "assist" or what associated applications of specialized knowledge are required. 
While a generalized description may be appropriate when defining the range of duties that are 
performed within an occupation, such generic descriptions generally cannot be relied upon by the 
Petitioner when discussing the duties attached to specific employment for H-1 B approval. In 
establishing such a position as a specialty occupation, the description of the proffered position must 
include sufficient details to substantiate that the Petitioner has H-1 B caliber work for the 
Beneficiary. Similarly, it is unclear what theoretical and practical application of a body of highly 
specialized knowledge is required to "assist associates ... in preparing documentation and 
presentation slides to bid for implementation work with different companies." Without a meaningful 
job description, the record lacks evidence sufficiently concrete and informative to demonstrate that 
the proffered position requires a specialty occupation's level of knowledge in a specific specialty. 
2 
While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
3 
.
Matter ofD-S-, Inc. 
The tasks as described do not communicate the actual work that the Beneficiary would perform, the 
complexity, uniqueness or specialization of the tasks, or the correlation between that work and a 
need for a particular level education of highly specialized knowledge in a specific specialty. 
In addition, the Petitioner repeatedly referenced that the Beneficiary \viii support on-site consultants 
working at "various client locations," but has not provided specific information about the projects, 
such as their duration or work required by these projects. Altho.ugh the Petitioner asserts that the 
provided list of invoices "demonstrates that [it] has had a consistent history of contracts and projects 
with customers," the Petitioner must still establish that it will have H-1 B caliber work for the 
Beneficiary for the duration of the requested employment. Without additional information regarding 
the projects to which the Beneficiary will provide support, we cannot determine \vhether the 
Petitioner has sufficient work for the Beneficiary for the duration of the requested H-1 B period. 
Moreover, contrary to the Petitioner's assertions that the Beneficiary will be exclusively assigned to 
work in-house for the duration of the requested employment, the record contains a number of 
documents that undermine its claims. According to the Petitioner's letter of support, it "can assign 
or reassign an employee as needed to in-house or customer projects in various locations" and the 
Beneficiary "is expected to send bi-weekly status reports to the supervisor at [the Petitioner] via 
email or phone" and "will have a regular status call with his supervisor at [the Petitioner] via 
(online meeting software)." This information is confirmed in the Beneficiary's offer letter and the 
"Job Duties and Project Confirmation" letter. The Petitioner does not explain why the Beneficiary 
would need to contact his supervisor via email, phone or if he is working in-house. 
Further, the organization chart indicates that the Beneficiary will be supervised by a sales manager. 
The Petitioner has not explained how a sales manager can meaningfully oversee the Beneficiary's 
substantive work as an MS BI developer. Moreover, while the organization chart lists names of 
employees and some job titles for lead positions, the chart does not identity job titles for other 
employees and their locations. For example, the Beneficiary's supervisor has 9 other direct reports, 
but the record does not indicate what their positions are and whether they are on-site or off-site. 
Other listed positions for the company include "SD/LE Systems Analyst," "SAP SD/LE Lead," 
"SAP HCM Lead," "CRM Consultant," and "Solutions Architect." Without further intonnation 
regarding other employees, \Ve are unable to determine if the Beneficiary's position as an MS BI 
developer can assist or support the work of onsite consultants. 
Finally, we must also note that the evidence does not establish whether or not the Petitioner has 
sufficient work space to support the employment of the Beneficiary, as well as an unspecified 
number of other in-house employees. According to the provided intommtion for its current location. 
the Petitioner's 2,166 square foot suite consists of only four offices, a conference room, a kitchen, 
and a reception area. As discussed, because the organization chart does not include job titles or 
locations for all employees, it is not clear how many additional employees there may be in-house, 
such as administrative staff or executives, or how many individuals work at the Petitioner's 
premises. Without additional information, we cannot determine if there is sufficient work space to 
support the employment of the Beneficiary. 
4 
Matter of D-S-, Inc. 
For all of the reasons above, we conclude that the Petitioner has not established the substantive 
nature of the work to be performed by the Beneficiary. This therefore precludes a finding that the 
proffered position satisfies any criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). because it is the 
substantive nature of that work that determines ( 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 tor 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. 
We must also address the stated minimum educational requirement for the proffered position of a 
bachelor's degree in "computer science, engineering, management intonnation systems, or a closely 
related field." In general, provided the specialties are closely related, · e.g., chemistry and 
biochemistry, a minimum of a bachelor's or higher degree in more than one specialty is recognized 
as satisfying the "degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent)" requirement of section 
214(i)(l )(B) of the Act. In such a case, the required "body of highly" specialized knowledge" would 
essentially be the same. Since there must be a close correlation between the required "body of 
highly specialized knowledge" and the position, however, a minimum entry requirement of a degree 
in two disparate fields, such as philosophy and engineering, would not meet the statutory 
requirement that the degree be "in the specific specialty (or its equivalent)," unless the Petitioner 
establishes how each field is directly related to the duties and responsibilities of the particular 
position such that the required "body of highly specialized knO\vledge" is essentially an 
amalgamation ofthese different specialties. Section 214(i)(l)(B) ofthe Act (emphasis added). 
In other words, while the statutory "the" and the regulatory "a" both denote a singular '"specialty," 
we do not so narrowly interpret these provisions to exclude positions from qualifying as specialty 
occupations if they permit, as a minimum entry requirement, degrees in more than one closely 
related specialty. See section 214(i)(l)(B) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). This also includes 
even seemingly disparate specialties providing, again, the evidence of record establishes how each 
acceptable, specific field of study is directly related to the duties and responsibilities of the particular 
position. 
The issue here is that the field of engineering is a broad category that covers numerous and various 
specialties, some of which are only related through the basic principles of science and mathematics, 
e.g., nuclear engineering and aerospace engineering. Therefore, besides a degree in electrical 
engineering, it is not readily apparent that a general degree in engineering or one of its other sub­
specialties, such as chemical engineering or nuclear engineering, is closely related to computer 
science or that all engineering specialties are directly related to the duties and responsibilities of the 
particular position proffered in this matter. 
5 
----------- --
Matter of D-S-, Inc. 
Here the Petitioner has not established that computer science and engineering in general are closely 
related fields or that engineering (or any and all engineering specialties) are directly related to the 
duties and responsibilities of the proffered position. Absent this evidence, it cannot be found that the 
particular position proffered in this matter has a normal minimum entry requirement of a bachelor's 
or higher degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent under the Petitioner's own standards. 3 
IV. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that the pro1Iered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of D-S-, Inc. ID# 225323 (AAO Apr. 19, 2017) 
3 
We also note that the Petitioner indicated that it would accept the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree "through 
education and experience," but did not state how it would make such a determination.