dismissed H-1B Case: Computer Science

MATTER OF E-C- INC 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JULY 26,2017 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a software development and consulting company, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a "programmer analyst" under the H-IB 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 Petitioner had 
not established that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. The Petitioner filed a combined 
motion to reopen and reconsider, and the Director affirmed her decision to deny the petition. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and 
asserts that the Director erred in her findings. 
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 E-C- 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 proffered 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 Roya/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). 
We note that, as recognized by the court in Defensor, 201 F.3d at 387-88, where the work is to be 
performed for entities other than the petitioner, evidence of the client companies' job requirements is 
critical. The court held that the former Immigration and Naturalization Service had reasonably 
interpreted the statute and regulations as requiring the petitioner to produce evidence that a proffered 
position qualifies as a specialty occupation on the basis of the requirements imposed by the entities 
using the beneficiary's services. !d. Such evidence must be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate the 
type and educational level of highly specialized knowledge in a specific discipline that is necessary 
to perform that particular work. 
II. PROFFERED POSITION 
In the H-1B petition, the Petitioner indicated that the Beneficiary will be employed at its office 
location in CA. On the labor condition application (LCA)2 submitted in support of the 
2 The Petitioner is required to submit a certified LCA to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to 
demonstrate that it will pay an H-1 B worker the higher of either the prevailing wage for the occupational classification in 
the "area of employment" or the actual wage paid by the employer to other employees with similar experience and 
qualifications who are performing the same services. See Matter of Simeio Solutions, LLC, 26 I&N Dec. 542, 545-546 
(AAO 2015). 
2 
.
Matter of E-C- Inc 
H-lB petltwn, the Petitioner designated the proffered positiOn under th~ occupational category 
"Computer Programmers" corresponding to the Standard Occupational Classification code 15-1131.3 
In support of the petition, the Petitioner submitted a job description and added the following 
percentage breakdown in response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE): 
• Ensures use requirements fit in with the overall development approach -5%. 
• Provide senior-level analytical, design, development, testing, implementation, and 
initial production support services -20%. 
• Develop within the technical framework of the client -20%. 
• Completes and finalizes the technical functional specifications of assigned tasks -
5%. 
• Assists DBAs in remodeling the database schema and migration of data -10%. 
• Creates class and activity diagrams as needed for assigned modules -10%. 
• Writes clean code following standard guidelines for the project including 
comments describing blocks of code and develops stored procedures, triggers, and 
view using T-SQL on SQL Server 2008 R2 -10% 
• Provide requirement specifications, design documentation, application code, 
test 
cases and scripts, test results, user documentation, training material, and 
implementation plans -10%. . ' 
• Perfonn unit testing, integration testing and system testing check-out as part of 
application development -5%. 
• Provide weekly status reports as required by, the project's Project Manager -5%. 
The Petitioner stated in a support letter that the proffered position "requires the application of 
knowledge gained through completion of a bachelor's degree or a closely related field." 
With the H-lB petition, the Petitioner also provided a letter from the 
(end-client) that confirmed existence of a contract between the Petitioner and 
the end-client. The end-client described the duties of the proffered position as follows: 
Partner with internal teams to define and prioritize informational requirements. 
Create reports and data extracts against large data sets using SQL Stay 
current with technical best practices and industry trends and advise and educate 
management on their importance. Work with teams to improve our reporting and 
3 The Petitioner classified the proffered position at a Level II wage. We will consider this selection 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 II wage rate is generally appropriate for positions for which the Petitioner expects the Beneficiary to 
have a good understanding of the occupation, but who will only perform moderately complex tasks that require limited 
judgment. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. 
Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at http://tlcdatacenter.com/download/ NPWHC _Guidance 
_Revised_ll_2009.pdf A prevailing wage determination starts with an entry level wage and progresses to a higher 
wage level after considering the experience, education, and skill requirements of the Petitioner's job opportunity. /d. 
3 
Matter of E-C- Inc 
analysis of our customers, products, or marketing programs. Visualizing and 
reporting data findings creatively in a variety of formats. Design AlB tests to 
evaluate behaviors. Evaluate third-party analysis tools for possible use within the 
project. Write Customize Framework for application. Provide weekly Status to 
Project Manager. Attend Daily Serum meetings. 
The end-client further indicated that the position requires, "a minimum of bachelor's degrees in 
computer science, engineering (any)[,] Information technology, management information systems, 
business administrat[ion] or related degree." 
III. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that it would employ the Beneficiary in a specialty occupation. 
Specifically, the record does not establish that the job duties require an educational background, or 
its equivalent, commensurate with a specialty occupation.4 
As a preliminary matter, the end-client letter states that a bachelor's degree in ·business 
administration would be sufficient for the position, and the Petitioner does not articulate a specific 
bachelor's degree requirement. USCIS 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 proposed position. See Royal Siam Corp., 484 F.3d at 147; 
Defensor, 201 F.3d at 387. 
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. There must be a close correlation 
between the required specialized studies and the position; thus, the mere requirement of a degree or 
general-purpose degree, without further specification, does not establish the position as a specialty 
occupation. Cf Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. 558, 560 (Comm'r 1988) ("The mere 
requirement of a college degree for the sake of general education, or to obtain what an employer 
perceives to be a higher caliber employee, also does not establish eligibility."). On the basis of the 
proffered position's educational requirement alone, we cannot find that the proffered position 
qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
Further, the Petitioner did not provide sufficient, credible evidence to establish in-house employment 
for the Beneficiary for the validity of the requested H-1 B employment period. Specifically, the 
Petitioner did not submit a job description to adequately convey the substantive work to be 
performed by the Beneficiary. The proffered position has beeri described in generalized terms that 
do not convey sufficient information to establish the relative complexity, uniqueness, or 
specialization of the proffered position or its duties. 
4 
The Petitioner submitted documentation in support of the H-1 B petition, including evidence regarding the proffered 
position and its business operations. While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and 
considered each one. 
4 
Matter of E-C- Inc 
For example, the Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary will "provide senior-level analytical, design, 
development, testing, implementation, and the initial production support services," 5 "write clean 
code following standard guidelines for the project," and "provide requirement specifications, design 
documentation, application code, test cases and scripts, test results, user documentation, training 
material, and implementation plans." In addition, one of the end-client letters indicates that the 
individuals working on their project would "partner with internal teams to define and prioritize 
informational requirements," "work with teams to improve our reporting and analysis of our 
customers, products, or marketing programs," be responsible for "visualizing and reporting data 
findings creatively in a variety of formats," "design A/B tests to evaluate behaviors," and "evaluate 
third-party analysis tools for possible use within the project." 6 
The. Petitioner did not provide a more detailed description explaining what particular duties the 
Beneficiary will perform on a day-to-day basis, nor is there a detailed explanation regarding the 
demands, level of responsibilities, complexity, or requirements necessary for the performance of 
these tluties (e.g., what "T-SQL," "SQL Server 2008 R2, or "A/B tests" are and what body of 
knowledge is required to perform the duties). Further, the letters do not make reference to the 
specifics of the projects on which the Beneficiary will work. The responsibilities for the proffered 
position contain generalized functions without providing sufficient information regarding the 
particular work and associated educational requirements. 
Consequently, we are precluded from finding that the proffered position satisfies any criterion at 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), because it is the substantiye nature of that work that determines: (1) 
the normal minimum educational requirement for 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 for 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. 7 
As the Petitioner has not established that it satisfies any of the criteria at 8 C.P.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), it cannot be found that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty 
occupation and the appeal must be dismissed on this basis alone. Nevertheless, we will perform a 
~omplete specialty occupation analysis under each of the four alternative criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
5 Frequently, the word "senior" in a job title is indicative that a Level Ill (experienced) wage should be considered; For 
more information about wage levels, see "Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance" supra, at 3. 
6 Notably, the letters from the end-clients do not name the Beneficiary; therefore, we are unable to determine which 
project the Beneficiary will work on. 
7 The Director also found that the Beneficiary's work location was insufficient to accommodate its employees. Since the 
specialty occupation issue is dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we need not further discuss this issue except to note 
that while the Petitioner submitted documents regarding its space including its current and future lease, the documents 
contain inconsistencies and do not sufficiently substantiate the Petitioner's claim. For example, the current lease appears 
to have expired as of October 2015. Further, the future lease is only a proposal, not an agreement, is not signed. 
5 
Matter of E-C- Inc 
§ 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A) for the occupation of computer programmer, the occupation certified on the 
LCA. 
A. First Criterion 
We tum 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 for 
entry into the particular position. 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. 8 
The subchapter of the Handbook entitled "How to Become a Computer Programmer" states, in 
pertinent part: "Most computer programmers have a bachelor's degree; however, some employers 
hire workers who have an associate's degree. Most programmers get a degree in computer science 
or a related subject." Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Labor, Occupational Outlook 
Handbook, Computer Programmers (20 16-17 ed. ). 
According to the Handbook, this occupation accommodates a wide spectrum of educational 
credentials, including less than a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. The Handbook states that 
some employers hire workers who have an associate's degree. Furthermore, while the Handbook's 
narrative indicates that most computer programmers obtain a degree - which could be either a 
bachelor's degree or an associate's degree - in computer science or a related field, the Handbook 
does not report that at least a bachelor's degree in this field, or its equivalent, is normally required. 
Thus, the Handbook does not indicate that the occupational category is one for which normally the 
minimum requirement for entry is a baccalaureate degree (or higher) in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. · 
In addition, the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) Summary Reports, referenced by the 
Petitioner, are also insufficient to establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty 
occupation normally requiring at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. O*NET OnLine does not state a requirement for a bachelor's degree for this 
occupation. Rather, it assigns this occupation a Job Zone "Four" rating, which groups it among 
occupations for which "most ... require a four-year bachelor's degree, but some do not." O*NET 
OnLine Summary Report for "15-1131.00 Computer Programmers," 
http://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/15-1131.00 (last visited July 24, 2017); O*NET OnLine 
Help- Job Zones, http://www.onetonline.org/help/online/zones (last visited July 24, 2017). Further, 
8 All of our references are to the 2016-2017 edition of the Handbook, which may be accessed at the Internet site 
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/. . 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 we regularly review the Handbook 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. 
6 
Matter of E-C- Inc 
O*NET OnLine does not indicate that four-year bachelor's degrees required by Job Zone Four 
occupations must be in a specific specialty directly related to the occupation. Therefore, O*NET 
OnLine information is not probative of the proffered position being a specialty occupation. 
The Petitioner has not provided sufficient documentation from a probative source to substantiate its 
assertion regarding the minimum baccalaureate degrees in a specific specialty required for entry into 
this particular position. 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 
individual with a degree[.]" 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong 
concentrates upon the common industry practice, while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the 
Petitioner's specific position. 
1. First Prong 
To satisfy this first 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. 
We generally consider the following sources of evidence to determine if there is such a common 
degree requirement: 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 establish 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) 
(considering these "factors" to inform the commonality of a degree requirement)). 
As previously discussed, the Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one for which 
the Handbook, or another authoritative source, reports a requirement for at least a bachelor's degree 
in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. We incorporate by reference the previous discussion on the 
matter. 
In support of this criteria, the Petitioner provided job announcements for positions with other 
companies. However, the Petitioner did not provide sufficient information to establish that it shares 
the same general characteristics with the advertising organizations. While the Petitioner asserts that the 
companies are in the same industry, the postings do not provide sufficient information regarding their 
operations to conduct a legitimate comparison. For example, one is a staffing company and does not 
provide any information regarding its client. Further, while the Petitioner supplemented the job 
7 
.
Matter of E-C- Inc 
postings with information from which provides general number of employees 
working for each company, the numbers vary from 11 to 200. The Petitioner indicates on the Form 
I-129 that it employs 4 
7 individuals. Moreover, the Petitioner does not explain how the services 
provided by these companies are similar to those provided by the Petitioner. Specifically, one of the 
advertisement states that it is "passionate about building highly creative, exciting and innovative 
entertainment for avid video game players." The record does not indicate that the Petitioner is 
engaged in entertainment/video game development. 
The job announcements state that a bachelor's degree in computer science, engineering, or a related 
degree is required, but the advertised positions do not appear to be parallel to the proffered position . 
Indeed, the job announcements require varying degrees of experience in addition to a bachelor 's 
degree, including 5 or more years of experience. Therefore, without further explanation, it is not 
apparent how the · submitted job announcements reflect positions parallel to the proffered position . 
Notably, the Petitioner submits a job posting for the proffered position indicating no experience 
requirement. It is not possible to conclude from the provided advertisements that the positions are 
parallel to the proffered position in their duties and level of responsibility. 
In addition, one job announcement states that a bachelor's degree in "business" would be sufficient 
for the position. Again, a requirement of a general-purpose bachelor's degree, without more, will 
not justify a finding that a particular position qualifies for classification as a specialty 
occupation. See Royal Siam Corp., 484 F .3d at 14 7. The job advertisements do not establish that 
organizations similar to the Petitioner routinely employ individuals with degrees in a specific 
specialty, in parallel positions in the Petitioner 's industry.9 
As tl)e record does not include probative evidence that a "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, the Petitioner has not satisfied the first alternative 
prong of8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
9 Even if all of the job posting s indicated that a requirement of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialt y is common to 
the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations (which they do not), the Petitioner has not demonstrated 
what statisticall y valid inferences , if any, can be drawn from the advertisements with regard to determining the common 
educational requirements for entry into parallel position s in similar organizations . See generally Earl Babbie, The 
Practice of 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 probabili ty 
sampling]" and that "random selection offers access to the body of probability theory , which provides the basi s for 
estimates of population parameters and estimates of error "). 
The Petitioner did not provide any independent evidence of how representative the job postin gs are of the particular 
advertising employers ' recruiting history for the type of job advertised . As the advertis ements are only solicitations for 
hire, they are not evidence of the actual hiring practices of these employers . 
8 
Matter of E-C- Inc 
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 
performed only by an individual with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. 
In this matter, the evidence of record does not distinguish the proffered position as unique from or 
more complex than other programmer analyst positions that can be performed by persons without at 
least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
The Petitioner has designated the proffered position as a Level II position on the LCA, indicating 
that it is a position for an employee who has a good understanding of the occupation but who will 
only perform moderately complex tasks that require limited judgment. Therefore, it does not appear 
that the position is one with complex or unique duties relative to other computer programmer 
positions, as such a higher-level position would likely be classified at a Level III (experienced) or 
Level IV (fully competent) wage level, requiring a significantly higher prevailing wage. 
We note that 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 leading 
. to a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is required to perform 
the duties of the proffered position. Upon review, the record lacks sufficiently detailed information 
to distinguish the proffered position as more complex or unique from other positions that can be 
performed by persons without at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
The Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary is well-qualified for the position, and references her 
education and experience as evidence that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. 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. Here, the Petitioner did not sufficiently develop relative complexity or 
uniqueness as an aspect of the duties of the position, and it did not identify any tasks that are so 
complex or unique that only a specifically degreed individual could perform them. Thus, it cannot 
be concluded that the Petitioner has 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. The 
record must establish that a petitioner's stated degree requirement is not a matter of preference for 
high-caliber candidates but is necessitated instead by performance requirements of the position. See 
Defensor, 201 F.3d at 387-88. If we were limited solely to reviewing the Petitioner's claimed self­
imposed requirements, then any individual with a .bachelor's degree could be brought to the United 
9 
Matter of E-C- Inc 
States to perform any occupation as long as the Petitioner created a token degree 
requirement. ld. Evidence provided in support of this criterion may include, but is not limited to, 
documentation regarding the Petitioner's past recruitment and hiring practices, as well as 
information regarding employees who previously held the position. 
In response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner submitted evidence relevant to some of its claimed 
employees including evidence of their degrees and payroll documentation. On appeal, the Petitioner 
provides another list reflecting more employees, their positions, and occupation codes. However, 
the Petitioner has not provided evidence and educational credentials for all of its employees. 
Furthermore, while the Petitioner provides evidence that some of their programmer analysts have 
foreign bachelor's degrees in the required specific specialty, it only submits degree equivalency 
documentation for three of these employees. Further, the Petitioner does not articulate or document 
how the performance of the position actually requires the theoretical and practical application of a 
body of highly specialized knowledge and the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in the 
specific specialty. The three employees appear to have bachelor's degrees in electronic engineering 
and computer science. However, the Petitioner does not explain or document the duties and 
responsibilities of these individuals' positions nor does it articulate the body of highly specialized 
knowledge required for these positions. In addition, although the Petitioner provides some payroll 
documentation, it does not submit IRS Forms W-2, Wage and Tax Statements, relevant to its 
asserted programmer analysts to confirm that they are, or were, employed by the Petitioner. The 
Petitioner must support its assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Chawathe, 
25 I&N Dec. at 376. 
Therefore, the Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.P.R.§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3). 
D. Fourth Criterion 
The fourth 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. 
The Petitioner asserts that the job duties of the proffered position are specialized and complex. 
Although the Petitioner generally refers to the Beneficiary's duties as "specialized," we find that the 
Petitioner has not sufficiently developed relative specialization and complexity as an aspect of the 
proffered position. The Petitioner only provides a generic description of duties and responsibilities, 
including familiarity and experience with different technological platforms and applications it 
expects from the Beneficiary. The proposed duties have not been described with sufficient 
specificity to show that they are more specialized and complex than other computer programmer 
positions that are not usually associated with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. We also incorporate our earlier discussion and analysis regarding the duties of the 
proffered position, and the designation of the position in the LCA as a Level II position, and not as 
10 
Matter of E-C- Inc 
the higher Level III (referring to "special skills or knowledge") or Level IV (referring to "complex or 
unusual problems") wage levels. 10 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that its proffered position is one with duties sufficiently 
specialized and complex to satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). 
IV. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not established that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. 
ORDER: The app~al is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of E-C- Inc, ID# 405901 (AAO July 26, 20 17) 
10 The Petitioner's designation of this position as a Level II position undermines its claim that the position is particuiarly 
complex, specialized, or unique compared to other positions within the same occupation. Nevertheless, a Level II 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), even 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 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 proffered position meets the requirements of section 214(i)(l) of the Act. 
II