dismissed H-1B Case: Computer Science

identifiing data deleted to 
prevent clcoily unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: 874 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: AUG 0 1 2006 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonirnmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(l S)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. fj 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
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. 
WAC 05 004 50874 
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 a ticket broker for sports and entertainment events that seeks to employ the beneficiary as a 
computer engineer. The petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty 
occupation pursuant to 10 1 (a)(l S)(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 proffered position is not a specialty occupation. On appeal, the 
petitioner submits a letter. 
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. 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty occupation, the position must meet one of 
the following criteria: 
(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. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) interprets 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 proffered position. 
The record of proceeding before the AAO contains: (1) Form 1-129 and supporting documentation; (2) the 
director's denial letter; and (3) Form I-290B ,and supporting documentation. The AAO reviewed the record in 
its entirety before issuing its decision. 
The petitioner is seeking the beneficiary's services as a computer engineer. Evidence of the beneficiary's 
duties includes: the 1-1 29 petition; the petitioner's September 20,2004 letter in support of the petition; and the 
Page 3 
petitioner's response to the director's request for evidence. According to this evidence, the beneficiary would 
be responsible for the following: 
[Plroviding technical assistance and expertise to our customer[s] with respect to our E-Bay and 
online interaction and internal system that supports our main and integrated software. He will 
recreate software problems, diagnosis [sic] and isolate identified problems, and apply 
appropriate solutions; develop and manage company website, design and maintain database, 
develop custom internet application, develop and maintain database driven Intranet for the 
company, develop E-commerce solutions, develop real-time data application using up-to-date 
technologies XML, manage the company Terminal Server, and assist in marketing technology 
such as Search Engine Optimization. 
The petitioner indicated that a qualified candidate for the job would possess a bachelor's degree in computer 
engineering. 
The director found that the proffered position was not a specialty occupation because the job is not a 
computer engineering position; it is a computer support specialist and systems administrator position. Citing 
to the Department of Labor's (DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook), 2004-2005 edition, the 
director noted that the minimum requirement for entry into the position was not a baccalaureate degree or its 
equivalent in a specific specialty. The director found further that the petitioner failed to establish any of the 
criteria found at 8 C.F.R. 4 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
On appeal, the petitioner states, in part, that the proffered position, which entails developing and creating 
custom software applications for ticket brokers, requires a bachelor's degree in computer science. He states 
further that the beneficiary "will be part of a development team that [develops] and implements this 
software." 
Upon review of the record, the petitioner has established none of the four criteria outlined in 
8 C.F.R. 4 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). Therefore, the proffered position is not a specialty occupation. 
The AAO turns first to the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 4 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(I) and (2): a baccalaureate or higher 
degree or its equivalent is the normal minimum requirement for entry into the particular position; a degree 
requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations; or a particular 
position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with a degree. 
Factors often considered by CIS when determining these criteria 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 degree! individuals." See Shanti, Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1 15 1, 1 165 (D. 
Minn. 1999)(quoting HirdBlaker Corp. v. Suva, 71 2 F. Supp. 1095,1102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). 
The AAO routinely consults the Handbook for its information about the duties and educational requirements of 
particular occupations. The AAO does not concur with the petitioner that the proffered position, which entails the 
development and management of the petitioner's website, is a specialty occupation. A review of the Computer 
Scientists and Database Administrators occupation category at pages 107-1 10 in the Handbook, 2006-2007 
WAC 05 004 50874 
Page 4 
edition, finds a discussion of various computer positions including IntemetIWeb developers. Regarding the 
training requirements for these positions, the DOL states, in part: "Most community colleges and many 
independent technical institutes and proprietary schools offer an associate's degree in computer science or a 
related information technology field. Many of these programs may be more geared toward meeting the needs of 
local businesses and are more occupation specific than are 4-year programs." In this case, the petitioner is a ticket 
broker for sports and entertainment events. Information on the petition that was signed by the petitioner's 
controller on September 27,2004, reflects that the petitioner was established in 1984, and has 46 employees and a 
gross annual income of $1 million. The petitioner, however, provides no evidence in support of these claims, such 
as federal income tax returns and quarterly wage reports. Simply going on record without supporting 
documentary evidence is not sufficient for the purpose of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. 
Matter of Soflci, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comrn. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 
I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comrn. 1972)). Further, although the petitioner asserts on appeal that the beneficiary 
would be part of a development team, the organizational hierarchy of the petitioner's employees is unclear, as 
the record contains no organizational chart or job descriptions for the petitioner's employees. Without such 
information, the exact nature of the proffered position is unclear. In view of the foregoing, the petitioner has 
not established that a baccalaureate or higher degree, or its equivalent, is required for the position described in 
the instant petition. 
The record does not include any evidence regarding parallel positions in the petitioner's industry. The record 
also does not include any evidence from firms, individuals, or professional associations regarding an industry 
standard, or documentation to support the complexity or uniqueness of the proffered position. 
The petitioner, therefore, has not established the criteria set forth at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l) or (2). 
The AAO now turns to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3) - the employer normally requires a 
degree or its equivalent for the position. As the petitioner does not address this issue on appeal, it will not be 
discussed further. The evidence of record does not establish this criterion. 
Finally, the AAO turns to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(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. 
To the extent that they are depicted in the record, the duties do not appear so specialized and complex as to 
require the highly specialized knowledge associated with a baccalaureate or higher degree, or its equivalent, 
in a specific specialty. Therefore, the evidence does not establish that the proffered position is a specialty 
occupation under 8 C.F.R. 9 2 1 4.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). 
As related in the discussion above, the petitioner has failed to establish that the proffered position is a 
specialty occupation. Accordingly, the AAO shall not 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. 5 1361. 
The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.