dismissed H-1B Case: Construction Engineering

idendrjling data deleted to 
Nvent clearly unwmted 
invasion of personal pi- 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave. N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: EAC 04 261 535 17 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: JUN 1 2 2006 
IN RE: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(l S)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 10 l(a)( 1 S)(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 ofice that originally decided your case. Any hrther inquiry must be made to that office. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
EAC 04 261 53517 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The director denied the nonimmigrant visa petition and the matter is now before the 
Administrative Appeals Ofice (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. The petition will be 
denied. 
The petitioner is construction engineering firm that seeks to employ the beneficiary as a technical 
writer/translator. The petitioner, therefore, endeavors to classify the beneficiary as a nonimmigrant worker 
in a specialty occupation pursuant to section lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(the Act), 8 U.S.C. 4 1 lOl(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b). 
The director denied the petition on the basis that the petitioner had failed to establish that the proposed 
position meets the definition of a specialty occupation as set forth at 8 C.F.R. 4 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
Section 214(i)(l) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 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. 4 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty occupation, the position must meet one of 
the following criteria: 
(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. 
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 proposed position. 
The record of proceeding before the AAO contains (1) the Form 1-129 and supporting documentation; (2) the 
director's denial letter; and (3) the Form I-290B and supporting documentation. The AAO reviewed the 
record in its entirety before issuing its decision. 
In its September 14,2004 letter of support, the petitioner stated that the duties of the proposed position would 
include translating scientific and technical information in the computer programming and software 
EAC 04 261 53517 
Page 3 
development field; preparing scientific and technical reports and operating and maintenance manuals; 
translating and editing catalogs, parts lists, assembly instructions, sales promotion materials, and project 
proposals; translating and editing technical reports, diagrams, and charts; translating during oral negotiations; 
and translating the petitioner's products into dictionary descriptions. The petitioner noted that the beneficiary 
would be required to analyze and research highly technical materials and be familiar with computer 
programming and software development data. 
The director denied the petition, finding it unqualified for classification as a specialty occupation: 
p]t appears that the beneficiary would be expected to write, edit, and translate materials 
from Russian to English and vice versa. Additionally, the beneficiary would be expected to 
be familiar with computer programming and software development. It appears that the 
beneficiary would not be expected to solely perform the specialized duties of a Technical 
Writer. Based upon the duties provided, it appears that the primary function that will be 
conducted by the beneficiary will be to translate. 
In determining whether a proposed position qualifies as a specialty occupation, CIS looks beyond the title 
of the position and determines, from a review of the duties of the position and any supporting evidence, 
whether the position actually requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly 
specialized knowledge, and the attainment of a baccalaureate degree in a specific specialty, as the 
minimum for entry into the occupation as required by the Act. The AAO routinely consults the 
Department of Labor's Occupational Outlook Handbook (the Handbook) for its information about the 
duties and educational requirements of particular occupations. 
The 2006-2007 edition of the Handbook sets forth the following information regarding the duties of 
technical writers: 
Technical writers put technical information into easily understandable language. They 
prepare operating and maintenance manuals, catalogs, parts lists, assembly instructions, 
sales promotion materials, and project proposals. Many technical writers work with 
engineers on technical subject matters to prepare written interpretations of engineering 
and design specifications and other information for a general readership. Technical 
writers may also serve as part of a team conducting usability studies to help improve the 
design of a product that still is in the prototype stage. They plan and edit technical 
materials and oversee the preparation of illustrations, photographs, diagrams, and charts. 
The Handbook sets forth the following information regarding the duties of translators: 
Translators convert written materials from one language into another. They must have 
excellent writing and analytical ability. And because the documents they translate must 
be as flawless as possible, they also need good editing skills. 
Translating involves more than replacing a word with its equivalent in another language; 
sentences and ideas must be manipulated to flow with the same coherence as those in the 
source document so that the translation reads as though it originated in the target 
language. Translators also must bear in mind any cultural references that may need to be 
explained to the intended audience, such as colloquialisms, slang, and other expressions 
EAC 04 261 53517 
Page 4 
that do not translate ,literally. Some subjects may be more difficult than others to translate 
because words or passages may have multiple meanings that make several translations 
possible. Not surprisingly, translated work often goes through multiple revisions before 
final text is submitted. 
The Handbook divides its discussion of the duties of translators into several categories. The section 
regarding localization translators states the following: 
Localization translators constitute a relatively recent and rapidly expanding specialty. 
Localization involves the complete adaptation of a product for use in a different language 
and culture. At its earlier stages, this work dealt primarily with software localization, but 
the specialty has expanded to include the adaptation of Internet sites and products in 
manufacturing and other business sectors. 
Translators working in localization need a solid grasp of the languages to be translated, a 
thorough understanding of technical concepts and vocabulary, and a high degree of 
knowledge about the intended target audience or users of the product. The goal of these 
specialists is for the product to appear as if it were originally manufactured in the country 
where it will be sold and supported. Because software often is involved, it is not 
uncommon for people who work in this area of translation to have a strong background in 
computer science or computer-related work experience. 
The duties of the proposed position as set forth in the petition more closely resemble those of a 
localization translator than those of a technical writer. As noted above, the primary role of a technical 
writer is to put technical language into easily understandable language. A reading of the Handbook's 
entry for this position does not lead to a conclusion that the authors contemplated translation from one 
language to another as one of the essential functions of the position. While the listed duties do include 
drafting and editing scientific and technical reports, these duties comprise a small portion of the listed 
duties and appear to form a small percentage of the total duties. As such, the AAO will consider the 
proposed position to be that of a localization translator and will adjudicate this appeal accordingly.' 
In that the duties of the proposed position are most closely aligned to those of a localization translator, the 
AAO next turns to the Handbook S discussion of the educational qualifications required for entry into the 
field: 
Beyond high school, there are many educational options. Although a bachelor's degree is 
often required, interpreters and translators note that it is acceptable to major in something 
other than a language. However, specialized training in how to do the work is generally 
required. A number of formal programs in interpreting and translation are available at 
1 Even if the AAO were to consider the proposed position to be that of a technical writer, it would not 
necessarily qualify as a specialty occupation, as claimed by counsel. The Handbook states the following 
with regard to the qualifications necessary for entry into the field of technical writing: "[i]ncreasingly, 
technical writing requires a degree in, or some knowledge about, a specialized field-engineering, 
business, or one of the sciences, for example. In many cases, people with good writing skills can learn 
specialized knowledge on the job." The "increasingly required" standard described in the Handbook is 
not synonymous with the "normally required" standard set forth by the regulation. Moreover, the 
beneficiary does not possess a degree in engineering, business, or one of the sciences. 
EAC 04 261 53517 
Page 5 
colleges nationwide and through nonuniversity training programs, conferences, and 
courses. Many people who work as conference interpreters or in more technical 
areas-such as localization, engineering, or finance-have master's degrees, while those 
working in the community as court or medical interpreters or translators are more likely 
to complete job-specific training programs. 
Accordingly, the proposed position cannot be considered a specialty occupation under the first criterion 
set forth at 8 C.F.R. 9 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). The fact that a degree is "often required" does not rise to the 
"normally required" standard imposed by the regulation. Moreover, that a degree in a wide range of fields is 
acceptable as a minimum requirement for entry into the occupation, the petitioner cannot establish that a 
degree in a particular specialty is required. As noted previously, CIS interprets the term "degree" in the 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. 9 214.2(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. 
Nor does the proposed position qualify as a specialty occupation under either prong of 
8 C.F.R. 8 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). The first prong of this regulation requires a showing that a specific degree 
requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. However, no such 
evidence has been presented. 
Thus, the proposed position does not qualify as a specialty occupation under the first prong of 
8 C.F.R. 9 2 14.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
The AAO also concludes that the record does not establish the proposed position as a specialty 
occupation under the second prong of 8 C.F.R. 8 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2), which requires a showing that the 
position is so complex or unique that it can only be performed by an individual with a degree. It finds no 
evidence that would support such a finding, as the position described in the petition is very similar to the 
localization translator position discussed in the Handbook. 
Accordingly, the petitioner has not established its proposed position as a specialty occupation under either 
alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
The AAO next turns to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3), which requires the petitioner to 
demonstrate that it normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the position. To determine a 
petitioner's ability to meet the third criterion, the AAO normally reviews the petitioner's past 
employment practices, as well as the histories, including the names and dates of employment, of those 
employees with degrees who previously held the position, and copies of those employees' diplomas. 
However, no such evidence has been presented. Thus, the third criterion of 8 C.F.R. $214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) 
has not been satisfied. 
The fourth criterion, 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4), requires the petitioner to establish that the nature of 
the proposed position's 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 the specialty occupation. 
A review of the duties of the proposed position does not lead to a conclusion that they would require the 
beneficiary to possess a higher degree of knowledge and skill than that normally expected of localization 
translators in other, similar organizations. The petitioner did not submit evidence of the type of work to 
be translated into Russian, a listing of the petitioner's products to be put into dictionary descriptions, or 
an example of the highly technical materials the beneficiary would analyze. The petitioner is a United 
EAC 04 261 53517 
Page 6 
States construction management firm and the record does not establish that it will be translating company 
materials into Russian, or for whom. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not 
sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Soffici, 22 I&N 
Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 
(Reg. Comm. 1972)). 
Thus, the proposed position does not qualify as a specialty occupation under 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(hX4)(iii)(A)(4). 
The proposed position does not qualify for classification as a specialty occupation under any of the 
criteria set forth at 8 C.F.R. $5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(I), (2), (3), ,and (4), and the director was correct to 
deny the petition. Accordingly, the AAO will not disturb the director's denial of the petition. As the 
proposed position is not a specialty occupation, the beneficiary's qualifications to perform its duties are 
immaterial. 
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.