dismissed H-1B Case: Computer Science

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF S-C-. INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JUNE L 2016 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-129. PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a development and consulting firm, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as 
an .. ERP systems analyse under the H-1 B nonimmigrant classification. See Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act)§ 101(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b). 8 U.S.C. * 110l(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, California Service Center, denied the petition. The Director concluded that there is 
insufficient evidence to establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeal. the Petitioner submits additional evidence and 
asserts that the Director's basis for denial of the petition was erroneous and contends that it satisfied 
all evidentiary requirements. Upon de noro review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
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. 
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 proffered position 
must meet one of the following criteria to qualify as a specialty occupation: 
(1) A baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry into the particular position: 
Matter ofS-C-. Inc. 
(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 
(.f.) 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). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has consistently 
interpreted 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 proposed 
position. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Cherto.ff; 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 
In the H-1 B petition. the Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary will serve as an '"ERP systems 
analyst." In the Jetter of support, the Petitioner provided the Beneficiary's job duties in the proffered 
position. 1 In addition. the Petitioner stated that the proffered position requires a bachelor· s degree in 
business. or related fields. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE). the Petitioner provided a revised job 
description for the position, along with the approximate percentage of time the Beneficiary will 
spend on each duty: 
DAILY TASK ACTIVITY TIME UTILIZED 
ON EACH TASK 
System Design (Gross Design and Modification) 10% 
Systems Analysis 20% 
Software Development 10% 
Write code and Develop programs 10% 
Developing I implementing and creating new software 10% 
Downloading historical data 10% 
Unit and System testing, performance and debugging 20% 
1 We observe that the wording of the duties provided by the Petitioner for the proffered position in the letter of support is 
taken almost verbatim from the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) OnLine's list of tasks associated with the 
occupation category .. Computer Systems Analysts.·· 
2 
Matter (~fS-C-. Inc. 
Generating management reporting and implementation and 
provision of technical software support. 
10% 
• Convert project specifications and statements of business processes and problems 
to detailed logical flow charts and diagrams (workflow) for coding in Advanced 
Business Application: 
• Programming (ABAP) programming language for functional modules like SAP 
Finance and Controlling (FIICO) etc.: 
• Work on Reports. Enhancements. Conversion Programs, SAP script & Smart 
Forms, User-Exits using suitable Business Add-In (BADis) and assist in 
migrating legacy data to SAP three-tier architecture (R/3) using Batch Data 
Communication (BDC): 
• Identify the critical elements of application problems. develop and evaluate data. 
determine solutions and make logical recommendations: 
• Troubleshoot and correct SAP modules problems by using ABAP programming 
language to implement Online Service System (OSS) notes: 
• Interact with business analysts to ensure the proper integration of business 
processes and procedures to information technology: 
• Prepare comprehensive and detailed technical program documentation including 
specifications, test conditions. test plans. test data. etc.; 
• Provide support in defining technical requirements for on-going systems 
maintenance and future functionalities keeping system optimization in mind: 
• Modify system screens to provide default values and eliminate unnecessary fields 
using transaction variants: 
• Train users on programming of forms and reports, define authorization roles tor 
security purposes, custom worktlows. and other related areas: 
• Consult with management to ensure agreement on system principles: expand or 
modify system to serve new purposes or improve work flow: 
• Interview or survey workers. observe job performance or perform the job to 
determine what information is processed and how it is processed: 
• Determine computer software or hardware needed to set up or alter system: 
• Train staff and users to work with computer systems and programs. 
The Petitioner also provided the following: 
Here is the list of Roles & Responsibilities [the Beneficiary] would per lsic] 
performing during the assignments: 
• Designing mapping documents in order to check the need of creation in BW. 
• Preparing design documents from the Business Requirement docs and identified 
the relevant data targets for satisfying the customer requirements. 
• Developing various objects like Cubes. ODS, Info Sources, InfoObjects etc. 
3 
Matter <?{S-C-, Inc. 
• Designing Transfer Rules and update rules including start routines, update 
routines and Transfer routines as per the requirement. 
• Responsible to deliver (Transport into Prod) the object as per the scheduled 
deadlines; with accuracy of deliverables by considering the quality norms. 
• Conceptual understanding of SAP 1-l.ana. 
• .Enhancements as per Business requirement. 
• Involving in the Client/Onsite communication for any client side clarifications, 
for assignment of work, for discussing on project status related issues, etc. 
According to the Petitioner, the position requires a bachelor's degree in computer applications. 
computer science. or a related field. 
III. ANALYSIS 
Upon review of the record of proceedings. we find that there are inconsistencies and discrepancies in 
the petition and supporting documents. which do not support the Petitioner's credibility with regard 
to the services the Beneficiary will perform. as well as the nature and requirements of the proffered 
position. When a petition includes numerous discrepancies, those inconsistencies will raise serious 
concerns about the veracity of the Petitioner's assertions. 
For example, there are additional discrepancies and inconsistencies in the record of proceedings with 
regard to the Beneficiary's rate of pay. For instance, in the H-1 B petition. the Petitioner stated that 
the Beneficiary would be paid $70.000 a year. However, in the Labor Condition Application (LCA). 
the Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary's compensation would be $60.000 per year. The Petitioner 
did not acknowledge or provide any explanation for the discrepancy. 
Fmihermore. the Petitioner has provided inconsistent information regarding the requirements for the 
proffered position. Specifically, in the letter of support, the Petitioner stated that the proffered 
position requires a bachelor's degree in business. or related fields. However. in response to the RFE. 
the Petitioner stated that the protlered position can only be performed by an individual with a 
baccalaureate degree or higher in computer applications. computer science. or a related field. No 
explanation for this apparent inconsistency was provided by the Petitioner. 
Within the record of proceedings. the Petitioner has represented that the position requires a 
bachelor's degree in business. computer applications, and/or computer science. It is important to 
note, that in generaL provided the specialties arc 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 
4 
Matter (~fS-C-. Inc. 
directly related to the duties and responsibilities of the particular position such that the required 
··body of highly specialized knowledge'' is essentially an amalgamation of these different specialties. 
Section 214(i)(l )(B) of the 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. 
Here. the Petitioner has represented that a bachelor's degree in business, computer applications. 
and/or computer science is acceptable. The issue here is that it is not readily apparent that business 
is closely related to these fields or that the field of business is directly related to the duties and 
responsibilities of the particular position proffered in this matter. Further. the Petitioner's claim that 
a bachelor's degree in business is a sufficient minimum requirement for entry into the proffered 
position is inadequate to establish that the proposed position qualifies as a specialty occupation. A 
petitioner must demonstrate that the proffered position requires a precise and specific course of study 
that relates directly and closely to the position in question. Since there must be a close correlation 
between the required specialized studies and the position. the requirement of a degree with a 
generalized title. such as business, without further specification, does not establish the position as a 
specialty occupation. 2 Cf Matter (?(Michael Hertz Assocs .. 19 I&N Dec. 558. 560 (Comm 'r 
1988). Accordingly. as the evidence of record does not establish a standard. minimum requirement 
of at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent. for entry into the particular 
position. it does not support the protTered position as being a specialty occupation. 
Nevertheless, we will continue our evaluation and analysis of the evidence provided by the 
Petitioner. 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 satisfies any of the criteria at 
] A general degree requirement does not necessarily preclude a proffered position from qualifying as a specialty 
occupation. For example, an entry requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in business administration with a 
concentration in a specific field. or a bachelor's or higher degree in business administration combined with relevant 
education, training, and/or experience may. in certain instances, quality the prot1ered position as a specialty 
occupation. In either case. it must be demonstrated that the entry requirement is equivalent to a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the prot1ered position. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff. 484 F.3d 
at 147. 
It is also important to note that a position may not qualify as a specialty occupation based solely on either a preference 
for certain qualifications for the position or the claimed requirements of a petitioner. See Defensor v. Meissner. 20 I F.3d 
384. 387 (5th Cir. 2000). Instead, the record must establish that the performance of the duties of the proffered position 
requires both the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge and the attainment of a 
baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent. as the minimum for entry into the 
occupation. See section 214(i)(l) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 2 I4.2(h)(4 )(ii)(detining the term ··specialty occupation"). 
5 
Matter ofS-C-, Inc. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) and. therefore, qualities as a specialty occupation. 3 Specitically, the 
record does not establish that the job duties require an educational background. or its equivalent. 
commensurate with a specialty occupation. 4 
A. First Criterion 
We turn first to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). which requires that a baccalaureate 
or higher degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement tor 
entry into the particular position. 5 To inform this inquiry. we recognize the U.S. Department of 
Labor's (DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) as an authoritative source on the 
duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses. h 
On the LCA submitted in support of the H-1 B petition. the Petitioner designated the proffered 
position under the occupational category '·Computer Systems Analysts,'' corresponding to the 
Standard Occupational Classification code 15-1121 at a Level I wage. 7 
3 In the decision denying the petition. the Director noted that the Petitioner had not established eligibility at the time of 
filing and noted that the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to substantiate the current and continued 
development of its in-house mobile application project. such as: (I) competitive, marketing and/or cost analysis; (2) a 
short- or long- term budget; (3) evidence substantiating investments or revenue sources; (4) documentation regarding its 
sales, costs, and income projections; (5) contracts: (6) its timeline and staffing requirements for developing products; 
and/or (7) marketing materials, company brochures, pamphlets. or other documentation describing in detail its products 
and services. We agree with the Director that the record does not establish that there will be sufficient work through the 
entire requested H-1 B validity period for the Beneficiary. Nevertheless. even assuming that the Petitioner had 
adequately addressed the discrepancy. the petition could not be approved because the Petitioner has not established that 
the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
4 
The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H-1 B petition, including evidence regarding the proffered 
position. While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
5 Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap. we will address each of the criteria individually. 
6 
All of our references are to the 2016-2017 edition of the Handbook, available at http: 1/www.bls.gov/oohi. We do not. 
however, maintain that the Handbook is the exclusive source of relevant information. That is. the occupational category 
designated by the Petitioner is considered as an aspect in establishing the general tasks and responsibilities of a proffered 
position. and USC IS regularly reviews the Ham/hook on the duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of 
occupations that it addresses. To satisfy the first criterion. however, the burden of proof remains on the Petitioner to 
submit sufficient evidence to support a finding that its particular position would normally have a minimum, specialty 
degree requirement. or its equivalent, for entry. 
7 
We will consider the Petitioner's classification of the proffered position at a Level I wage (the lowest of four assignable 
wage levels) in our analysis of the position. The "Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance" issued by the DOL 
provides a description of the wage levels. A Level I wage rate is generally appropriate for positions for which the 
Petitioner expects the Beneficiary to have a basic understanding of the occupation. This wage rate indicates: (I) that the 
Beneficiary will be expected to perform routine tasks that require limited, if any, exercise of judgment: (2) that he will be 
closely supervised and his work closely monitored and reviewed for accuracy; and (3) that he \Viii receive specific 
instructions on required tasks and expected results. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin .. l'rerai!ing Wage 
Determination l'olicy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009). available at 
http://flcdatacenter.comidownload/NPWHC _Guidance_ Revised 11_2009.pdf. A prevailing \\age determination starts 
with an entry level wage and progresses to a higher \vage level after considering the experience. education. and skill 
requirements ofthe Petitioner's job opportunity. !d. A Level I wage should be considered for research fellows, workers 
in training. or internships. !d. 
Matter o(S-C-. Inc. 
The Handbook subchapter entitled ··How to Become a Computer Systems Analyse states. in 
pertinent part: ··A bachelor's degree in a computer or information science field is common. although 
not always a requirement. Some firms hire analysts with business or liberal arts degrees who have 
skills in information technology or computer programming:· U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor 
Statistics. Occupational Outlook Handbook. 2016-17 ed.. ··computer Systems Analysts.·· 
http://www. b Is. gov I ooh/ computer-and-information- techno logy I computer-systems-analysts. htm#tab-
4 (last visited May 27. 2016). The Handbook also states: .. Although many computer systems 
analysts have technical degrees. such a degree is not always a requirement. Many analysts have 
liberal arts degrees and have gained programming or technical expertise elsewhere:' !d. 
The Handbook indicates that a bachelor's degree in a computer or information science field may be 
common, but not that it is a requirement for entry into these jobs. In fact this chapter reports that 
.. many'' computer systems analysts may only have liberal arts degrees and programming or technical 
experience. but does not further qualify the amount of experience needed. The Handbook also notes 
that many analysts have technical degrees, but does not specify a degree level (e.g .. associate· s 
degree) for these degrees. The Handbook further specifies that such a technical degree is not always 
a requirement. Thus. this passage of the Handbook repmis that there are several paths for entry into 
the occupation. 
In addition, the Petitioner referenced the O*NET OnLine Summary Report tor the occupational 
category "Computer Systems Analysts" to support the assertion that the proffered position qualifies 
as a specialty occupation. The Petitioner stated that the O*NET assigns a designation of Job Zone 4 
to computer systems analyst positions and, therefore. it is clear that the position is a specialty 
occupation. A Job Zone 4 indicates that a position requires considerable preparation. It does not 
however, demonstrate that a bachelor's degree in any spec(flc .\pecialty is required. and does not. 
therefore, demonstrate that a position so designated is in a specialty occupation as defined in section 
214(i)(l) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). The O*NET OnLine Help Center provides a 
discussion of the Job Zone 4 designation and explains that this zone signifies only that most but not 
all of the occupations within it. require a bachelor's degree. See O*NET OnLine Help Center at 
http://www.onetonline.org/help/online/zones. Further. the Help Center discussion confirms that a 
designation of Job Zone 4 does not indicate any requirements tor particular majors or academic 
concentrations. Therefore, despite the Petitioner's assertion to the contrary. the O*NET Summary 
Report is not probative evidence that the proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation. 
Thus. the Petitioner has not provided documentation from a probative source to substantiate its 
assetiion regarding the minimum requirement for entry into this particular position. Thus. the 
Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). 
B. Second Criterion 
The second criterion presents two. alternative prongs: .. 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 
(b)(6)
Malter c?fS-C-. Inc. 
individual with a degree[.]" 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong 
contemplates the common industry practice, while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the 
Petitioner· s specific position. 
I. First Prong 
To satisfy this tirst prong of the second criterion, the Petitioner must establish that the .. degree 
requirement"' (i.e .. a requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty. or its 
equivalent) is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. 
In determining whether there is such a common degree requirement. factors often considered by 
USCIS 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 aflidavits from firms or individuals in the industry attest that such firms "routinely employ 
and recruit only degreed individuals ... See Shanti. Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151. 1165 (D. Minn. 
1999) (quoting Hird/Blaker Corp. v. Sava. 712 F. Supp. 1095, 1102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). 
As previously discussed, the Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one for which 
the Handbook, or other authoritative source, reports a requirement for at least a bachelor's degree in 
a specific specialty, or its equivalent. Thus. we incorporate by reference the previous discussion on 
the matter. Also, there are no submissions from the industry's professional association indicating 
that it has made a degree a minimum entry requirement. Furthermore, the Petitioner did not submit 
any letters or affidavits from similar firms or individuals in the Petitioner's industry attesting that 
such firms "routinely employ and recruit only degreed individuals ... 
In support of this criterion, the Petitioner submitted copies of job announcements placed by other 
employers. However , upon review of the documents. we find that the Petitioner's reliance on the job 
announcements is misplaced. First, we note that some of the job postings do not appear to involve 
organizations similar to the Petitioner. For example, the advertising organizations include: 
• - a company that provides replacement parts for aviation ground support 
equipment; 
• -a company in the metals and minerals industry; and 
• - a company that provides aviation simulation and training solutions to the 
commercial and military markets. 
Furthermore, one of the postings appears to be for a staffing agency, which little information is 
provided regarding the hiring employer. The Petitioner did not supplement the record to establish 
that the advertising organizations are similar to it. 
When determining whether the Petitioner and the organization share the same general 
characteristics , such factors may include information regarding the nature or type of organization. 
and. when pertinent. the particular scope of operations. as well as the level of revenue and stafling 
8 
Af(lf/er (?fS-C-. Inc. 
(to list just a few elements that may be considered). It is not sufficient for the Petitioner to claim that 
an organization is similar and in the same industry without providing a legitimate basis for such an 
assertion. 
Moreover, many of the advertisements do not appear to be for parallel positions. For example. some 
of the positions appear to be for more senior positions than the proffered position. The Petitioner has 
not sutliciently established that the primary duties and responsibilities of the advertised positions are 
parallel to the protTered position. 
In addition, some of the postings do not indicate that at least a bachelor's degree in a directly related 
specific specialty (or its equivalent) is required. 8 The job postings suggest, at best that although a 
bachelor's degree is sometimes required for ERP system analyst positions, a bachelor's degree in a 
.\pec!flc .\pecialty (or its equivalent) is not.9 
As the documentation does not establish that the Petitioner has met this prong of the regulations. 
further analysis regarding the specific information contained in each of the job postings is not 
necessary. 10 That is, not every deficit of every job posting has been addressed. 
Without more, the Petitioner has not provided sutlicient evidence to establish that a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common to the industry in parallel positions 
among similar organizations. Thus, the Petitioner has not satisfied the first alternative prong of 8 
C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
2. Second Prong 
We will next consider the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). which is 
satisfied if the Petitioner shows that its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be 
8 As discussed. the degree requirement set by the statutory and regulatory framework of the H-1 8 program is not just a 
bachelor's or higher degree. but a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the duties of the 
position. See section 214(i)(l )(b) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(ii). Further, a desire or preference for a degree 
in a field is not necessarily an indication of a minimum requirement. 
9 
It must be noted that even if all of the job postings indicated that a requirement of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations (which they do not). the Petitioner 
has not demonstrated what statistically valid inferences. if any, can be drawn from the advertisements with regard to 
determining the common educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations. See 
generalzv Earl Babbie, The Practice l?{Social Research 186-228 ( 1995). Moreover, given that there is no indication that 
the advertisements were randomly selected, the validity of any such inferences could not be accurately determined even 
if the sampling unit were sufficiently large. See id. at 195-196 (explaining that "[r]andom selection is the key to [the] 
process [of probability sampling]" and that "random selection otTers access to the body of probability theory. which 
provides the basis for estimates of population parameters and estimates of error"). 
10 
The Petitioner did not provide any independent evidence of how representative the job postings are of the particular 
advertising employers' recruiting history tor the type of job advertised. As the advertisements are only solicitations for 
hire, they are not evidence of the actual hiring practices of these employers. 
9 
Matter (?lS-C-, Inc. 
performed only by an individual with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. 
We reviewed the Petitioner's statements regarding the proffered position; however. in the appeal 
brief: the Petitioner does not assert that it satisfies this prong of the second criterion. Further. the 
Petitioner has not sufficiently developed relative complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the 
proffered position. Thus, the Petitioner has not satisfied the second alternative prong of 8 C .F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
C. Third Criterion 
The third criterion of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) entails an employer demonstrating that it 
normally requires a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent for the position. 
In response to the RFE. the Petitioner stated that it .. has only hired individuals for the position of 
ERP Systems Analyst that had the requisite baccalaureate degree in Computer Applications. 
Computer Science. or a related field.·· However. the Petitioner has not submitted evidence to 
support this assertion ... [G]oing on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient 
for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings." /~latter (~j5:r?{fici, 22 I&N Dec. 
158. 165 (Comm'r 1998) (citing Matter fd'Treasure Craji <~{Cal.. 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg'l Comm·r 
1972)). Therefore. the Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C .F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii )(A)(3). 
D. Fourth Criterion 
The fom1h criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) requires a petitioner to establish that the nature 
of the specific duties is so specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform them is 
usually associated with the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty. or 
its equivalent. 
In support of this criterion, the Petitioner provided a description of the duties of the proffered 
position and information regarding its business operations. The Petitioner claims that the .. duties [of 
the proffered position] are so complex and specialized that only a person with a baccalaureate degree 
or higher in Computer Applications, Computer Science, or a related field could perform them.·· The 
evidence does not, however, support the Petitioner's assertion. Contrary to the Petitioner's assertion 
that the position is a so complex and specialized. the Petitioner designated the proffered position on 
the LCA as a Level I wage level. 11 As discussed earlier, this designation indicates that the proffered 
11 
The Petitioner's designation ofthis position as a LevelL entry-level position undennines its claim that the position is 
particularly complex compared to other positions within the same occupation. Nevertheless, a Level I wage-designation 
does not preclude a proffered position from classification as a specialty occupation, just as a Level IV wage-designation 
does not definitively establish such a classification. In certain occupations (e.g .. doctors or lawyers), a Level I, entry­
level position would still require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent. for 
entry. Similarly, however, a Level IV wage-designation would not reflect that an occupation qualifies as a specialty 
occupation if that higher-level position does not have an entry requirement of at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
10 
Malter l?(S-C-, Inc. 
position is a lmv-level, entry position relative to others within the .. Computer Systems Analysts'" 
occupational category. 12 
While the Petitioner may believe that the proffered position meets this criterion of the regulations, it 
has not sufficiently demonstrated how the position as described requires the theoretical and practical 
application of a body of highly specialized knowledge and the attainment of a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. For instance, the Petitioner did not submit 
information relevant to a detailed course of study leading to a specialty degree and did not establish 
how such a curriculum is necessary to perform the tasks. While a few related courses may be 
beneficial in performing certain duties of the position, the Petitioner has not demonstrated how an 
established curriculum of such courses is required. The evidence in the record does not refute the 
Handbook's information to the effect that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent, is not required for entry into the occupation in the United States. Without more, the 
record lacks sufficiently detailed information to distinguish the level of judgment and understanding 
necessary to perform the duties as specialized and complex. 
In addition, the Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary is well qualified for the pos1t10n. and 
references his qualifications. However. the test to establish a position as a specialty occupation is 
not the education or experience of a proposed beneficiary, but whether the position itself requires at 
least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. The Petitioner has not 
demonstrated in the record that its proffered position is one with duties sufficiently specialized and 
complex to satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(-1). 
IV. CONCLUSION 
Because the Petitioner has not satisfied one of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), it has not 
demonstrated that the proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation. The burden is on the 
Petitioner to show eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act. 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1361; Mutter qf'Otiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 (BIA 2013). Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Maller l?(S-C-, Inc., ID# 17304 (AAO June L 2016) 
specialty, or its equivalent. That is, a position's wage level designation may be a relevant factor but is not itself 
conclusive evidence that a protTered position meets the requirements of section 214(i)( I) of the Act. 
12 A Level IV (fully competent) position is designated by DOL for employees who --use advanced skills and diversified 
knowledge to solve unusual and complex problems'' and requires a significantly higher wage. For additional information 
regarding wage levels as defined by DOL see U.S. Dep't of Labor. Emp't & Training Admin .. Prerailing Wage 
Determination PolicJ' Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009). available at 
http://www. foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdfiNPWIIC _Guidance_ Revised _II_ 2009 .pdf. 
I 1