dismissed H-1B Case: Computer Science

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rrn. A3042 
date delekg4 @S 
ppent d: -R+~arrmgezv 
P 3 * "pT 
..rsr '. G,,'. *. - A;-l,yqq 'P- 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: WAC 04 048 52524 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: $'-;p F m -, 0 T;? 
.+ rrr " ' ;j 2dL,j,; 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1 10 1 (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 
WAC 04 048 52524 
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 an architectural design business that seeks to employ the beneficiary as a computer and 
information systems manager. The petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as a nonimmigrant worker 
in a specialty occupation pursuant to 5 10 l(a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 
8 U.S.C. $ 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b). 
The director denied the petition because the beneficia~y is not qualified to perform the duties of a specialty 
occupation. On appeal, counsel submits a brief and additional evidence, including two expert opinion letters 
and a revised credentials evaluation for the beneficiary. 
Section 214(i)(2) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1184(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 sewices 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, andlor progressively responsible experience 
that is equivalent to com,pletion 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. 
WAC 04 048 52524 
Page 3 
The petitioner is seeking the beneficiary's services as a computer and information systems manager. Although 
not explicitly stated, it appears that the petitioner requires a baccalaureate degree or its equivalent in a 
computer-related field for the proffered position. 
The director found that the beneficiary was not qualified for the proffered position because the beneficiary's 
education, experience, and training were not equivalent to a baccalaureate degree in a specialty required by 
the occupation. On appeal, counsel states, in part, that the beneficiary is qualified for the position because his 
associate's degree in electrical engineering coupled with four years of computer-related experience with the 
Israeli Air Force and 13 years of other pertinent work experience are the equivalent of a bachelor's degree in 
computer technology from an accredited U.S. university. Counsel submits two expert opinion letters and a 
revised credential evaluation from the Foundation for International Services, Bnc., as supporting 
documentation. 
The record contains the following documentation pertaining to the beneficiary's qualifications: 
Evaluation report, dated December 3, 2003, from the Foundation for International Services, 
Inc., concluding that the beneficlary' s educational background and employment experience are 
the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree in computer technology; 
Revised evaluation report, dated May 28, 2004, from the Foundation for International Services, 
hc., concluding that, based on evidence including two expert opinions, the beneficiary's 
educational background and employment experience are the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's 
degree in computer information technology/computer technology; 
e Expert opinion, dated May 21, 2004, from a U.S. university computer science professor, who 
finds, in part, that the beneficiary's education and experience are equivalent to a U.S. 
baccalaureate degree in computer technology; and 
Expert opinion, dated May 26, 2004, from a second U.S. university computer science professor, 
who has authority to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience in computer 
science, who finds, in part, that the beneficiary's education and experience are equivalent to a 
U.S. bachelor's degree in computer information technology. 
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 W.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. 
?j 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C)(4). 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. $ 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 andlor work experience; 
WAC 04 048 52524 
Page 4 
(2) The resuits 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, 
andlor 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, dated December 3, 2003, from the Foundation for International Services, 
Inc., a company that specializes in evaluating academic credentials. The evaluator concluded that the 
beneficiary possesses the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree in computer technology. However, the 
evaluation is based upon the beneficiary's education and work experience. A credentials evaluation service 
may not evaluate an alien's work experience or training; it can only evaluate educational credentials. See 
8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(3). Thus, the evaluation carries no weight in these proceedings. Matter of Sea, 
Inc., 19 I&N Dec. 8 17 (Comm. 1988). 
The record also contains an expert opinion, dated May 26, 2004, from a U.S. university computer science 
professor, who has authority to grant college-level credit for training andor experience in computer science, 
who finds, in part, that the beneficiary's education and experience are equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree 
in computer information technology. Although the opinion is based on the beneficiary's education and 
employment experience, the record, as it is presently constituted, contains no supporting documentation, such 
as copies of the beneficiary's academic transcripts and letters from the beneficiary's foreign employers. 
Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the 
burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Sofici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter 
of Treasure CraJ of Calfornia, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). CIS may, in its discretion, use as 
advisory opinion 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 (Corn. 1988). 
When CIS determines an alien's qualifications pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(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: 
WAC 04 048 52524 
Page 5 
(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. 
The record contains a second, revised evaluation report from the Foundation for International Services, Inc., 
concluding that, based on evidence including two expert opinions, the beneficiary's educational background 
and employment experience are the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree in computer information 
technology/computer technology. The record also contains an expert opinion, dated May 21, 2004, from a 
U.S. university computer science professor, who finds, in part, that the beneficiary's education and experience 
are equivalent to a U.S. baccalaureate degree in computer technology. Again, although the conclusions are 
based on the beneficiary's education and employment experience, the record, as it is presently constituted, 
contains no supporting documentation, such as copies of the beneficiary's academic transcripts and letters 
from the beneficiary's foreign employers. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not 
sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Sofici, 22 I&N Dec. 
158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Corn. 
1972)). CIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinion 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). 
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 the record contains no 
employment letters from the beneficiary's foreign employers, the AAO cannot conclude that the beneficiary's 
past work experience included the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of 
meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Sofici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Corn. 1998) 
(citing Matter of Treasure Cra3 of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). 
' 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. 5 214.2(h)(4)(ii). 
WAC 04 048 52524 
Page 6 
Finally, there is insufficient evidence that the beneficiary has recognition of expertise. The AAO notes that 
none of the evaluators or academic experts can be considered a "recognized authority" because the record 
contains no copies of the beneficiary's academic transcripts and foreign employment letters, upon which they 
based their conclusions. 
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. 
Beyond the decision of the director, the AAO does not find that the proffered position is a specialty 
occupation because the petitioner has not clearly defined the beneficiary's proposed duties. Although the 
petitioner's president/CEO asserts that the petitioner has experienced "unprecedented growth," thereby 
necessitating the services of the beneficiary, the record contains no evidence of such growth. Going on record 
without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in 
these proceedings. Matter of Sofici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Corn. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of 
Calqornia, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). For this additional reason, the petition may not be 
approved. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
5 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
BBDER: The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.