dismissed H-1B Case: Computer Science

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave. N.W., Rm. A3042 
cdeatiEyhg data deleted 60 
Washington, DC 20529 
S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
.- FILE: LIN 04 042 52452 Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER ~ate:oCT 2 1 2005 
- 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Petition for of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 9 1 101(a)(l 5)(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, Director 
Administrative Appeals Office 
LTN 04 042 52452 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The 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 computer programming and software development company that seeks to employ the 
beneficiary as a systems analyst. The petitioner, therefore, endeavors to classify the beneficiary as a 
nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to section I0 l (a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration 
andNationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 9 1101(a)(l5)(W)(i)(b). 
The director denied the petition, finding that the beneficiary does not qualify to perform the duties of a 
specialty occupation. 
On appeal, counsel contends that the beneficiary does qualify to perfonn the duties of a specialty occupation. 
The record of proceeding before the AAO contains (1) the Fonn 1-129 and suppohng documentation; (2) the 
director's request for evidence (WE); (3) the petitioner's RFE response and supporting documentation; 
(4) the director's denial letter; and (5) the Form I-290B and supporting documentation. The AAO reviewed 
the record in its entirety before issuing its decision. 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 3 214.2(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 fiom 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 stxte 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. 
h making its determination as to whether the beneficiary qualifies to perfonn the duties of a specialty 
occupation, the AA0 tuns to the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 3 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C), as described above. The 
beneficiary did not earn a degree from a United States institution of higher education, so he does not 
qualify under the first criterion. 
Nor does the beneficiary qualify under the second criterion, which requires a demonstration that the 
beneficiary's foreign degree has been determined to be equivalent to a United States baccalaureate or 
higher degree required by the specialty occupation from an accredited college or university. Counsel 
submitted an evaluation of education and experience from the Multi-national Education & Information 
Services, Lnc. (MEIS), dated May 19, 2004. Mile the MEIS evaluator determined that the combination 
LlN 04 042 52452 
Page 3 
of the beneficiary's foreign education and experience are equivalent to a bachelor's degree in business 
administration and computer science and a master's degree in business administration, this evaluation 
does not satisfy 8 C.F.R. tj 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C)(2). In order to qualify under this criterion, the evaluation 
must be based solely upon the beneficiary's foreign degree; a credentials evaluation service may evaluate 
educational credentials only. 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(3). 
As such, the APaO may only consider the portion of this evaluation that pertains to the beneficiary's 
foreign education. Based upon its evaluation of the beneficiary's foreign education alone, the 
MEIS evaluator determined that the beneficiary's foreign education is equivalent to five years of 
academic study in business administration from an accredited college in the United States. 
In order to qualify to perform the duties of a specialty occupation under 8 C.F.R. 8 214.2@)(4)(iii)(C)(2), 
the beneficiary's degree must be in the field required by the specialty. The Handbook indicates that many 
systems analyst positions require a bachelor's degree in computer science, information science, or 
management information systems. Thus, the beneficiary's five years of academic study in business 
administration do not quaPifL under this criterion. 
The record does not demonstrate, nor has counsel contended, that the beneficiary holds an unrestricted 
state license, registration or certification to practice the specialty occupation, so he does not qualify under 
the third criterion, either. 
The fourth criterion, set forth at 8 C.F.R. tj 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C)(4), requires a showing that the 
beneficiary's education, specialized training, andlor progressively responsible experience is equivalent to 
the completion of a United States baccalaureate or higher degree in the specialty occupation, and that the 
beneficiary also has recognition of that expertise in the specialty through progressively responsible 
positions directly related to the specialty. 
Thus, it is the fourth criterion under which the petitioner seeks to classify the beneficiary's combination 
of education and work experience. Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. tj 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D), equating a beneficiary's 
credentials to a United States baccalaureate or higher degree is determined by one or more of the 
following: 
(I) An evaluation from an official who has authority to grant college-level credit for 
training andlor 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 Noncollegate 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; 
LI[N 04 042 52452 
Page 4 
(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, andor 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 beneficiary's combination of education and previous experience do not satisfy 8 C.F.R. 
9 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(I). Although the MEIS evaluation does state that the combination of the 
beneficiary's education and experience is equivalent to a bachelor's degree in business administration and 
computer science, as well as a master's degree in business administration, there has been no showing that 
the MEIS evaluator has the authority to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience in this 
field at an accredited college or university which has a program for granting such credit based on an 
individual's training andor work experience. As noted previously, a credentials evaluation service may 
evaluate educational credentials only. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(3). Therefore, the MEIS evaluation 
of education and work experience cannot be accepted for the purpose sf establishing the beneficiary's 
educational credentials. 
No evidence has been submitted to establish, nor has counsel contended, that the beneficiary satisfies 
8 C.F.R. 4 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(2), which requires that the beneficiary submit 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 hstruction (PONSI). 
Nor does the beneficiary satisfy 8 C.F.R. 4 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(3). As was the case under 8 C.F.R. 
fj 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C)(2), the beneficiary is unqualified under this criterion because the MEIS evaluation 
was based upon both education and experience. In order to qualify under this criterion, the 
MEIS evaluation would have to have been based upon foreign educational credentials alone. The MO 
may accept the portion of the evaluation based upon the beneficiary's foreign education alone, which 
indicates that it is equivalent to five years of academic study in business administration. As discussed 
previously, this degree is insufficient under the Handbook for systems analysts. 
No evidence has been submitted to establish, nor has counsel contended, that the beneficiary satisfies 
8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(4), which requires that the beneficiary submit evidence of certification or 
registration from a nationally-recognized professional association or society for the specialty that is 
know to grant certification or registration to persons in the occupational specialty who have achieved a 
certain level of competence in the specialty. 
The AAO next turns to the fifth criterion. When CIS determines an alien's qualifications pursuant to 
8 C.F.R. 9 214,2(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 
working 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: 
EIN 04 042 52452 
Page 5 
(i) Recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation by at least two recognized 
authorities in the same specialty occupation'; 
(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. 
Counsel's submission traces the beneficiary's work experience Erom Febmary 1999 onward, for a period 
of four years and nine months (the beneficiary entered the United States in November 2003). As 
provided by regulation, the formula utilized by CIS is three years of specialized training and/or work 
experience for each year of college-level training that the alien lacks. A baccalaureate degree from a 
United States institution of higher education would require four years of study. The beneficiary has the 
equivalent of a four-year university degree, for which the AAO will recognize two years of academic 
study in general courses leading to a four-year degree. The beneficiary must therefore demonstrate at 
least six years of qualifying work experience in order to qualify for an equivalency in computer studies. 
As the beneficiary does not possess the requisite six years of work experience in the field, the A40 need 
not determine whether his previous work experience satisfies the criteria set forth in subsections (i), (ii), 
(iii), (iv), or (v) of 8 C.F.R. 3 214.2(h>(4)(iii>(D)(5). The fifth criterion of 8 C.F.R. 3 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D) 
has not been satisfied. 
The AAO notes further that the evidence of the beneficiary's qualifying work experience in the record 
does not establish that the work experience included the theoretical and practical application of 
specialized knowledge required by the specialty occupation, that it was gained while working with peers, 
supervisors, or subordinates who held a degree or its equivalent in accounting, and that he achieved 
recognition of expertise in the specialty. 
As such, the beneficiary is not qualified to perform the duties of the specialty occupation. 
The AAO notes that in his request for evidence, the director requested clarification regarding doubts that 
arose during the service center's review of the petition. For example, the director noted that the 
beneficiary was granted a single-entry B-1/B-2 visa, valid for three months, so that the beneficiary could 
attend a tile and stone show in Las Vegas, Nevada. The director stated the following: 
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. 3 214.2(h)(4)(ii). 
LIN 04 042 52452 
Page 6 
The Service also notes that the information given in the statement does not corroborate 
the beneficiary's assertions on his resume. It is also unclear why, if the beneficiary was 
worlung as a software engineer in a technology corporation, he was issued his B-1 
business visitor visa to attend a tile and stone show, which does not appear related to his 
alleged occupation. 
However, neither counsel nor the petitioner addressed this issue. The purpose of a request for evidence is 
to elicit further information that clarifies whether eligbility for the benefit sought has been established. 
8 C.F.R. 9 103.2(b)(8). Failure to subinit requested evidence that precludes a material line of inquiry 
shall be grounds for denying the petition. 8 C.F.R. 9 103.2(b)(14). Doubt cast on any aspect of the 
petitioner's proof may, of course, lead to a reevaluation of the reliability and sufficiency of the remaining 
evidence offered in support of the visa petition. It is incumbent upon the petitioner to resolve any 
inconsistencies in the record by independent objective evidence, and attempts to explain or reconcile such 
inconsistencies, absent competent objective evidence pointing to where the truth, in fact, lies, will not 
suffice. Ahtler ofHo, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BLA 1988). 
The petitioner has not established that the beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of a specialty 
occupation. Accordingly, the AAO will inot 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. 
tj 136 1. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
OWDEW: The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.