dismissed H-1B Case: E-Commerce

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF K-T- INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the , 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JAN. 12,2017 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a two-employee company engaged in e-commerce and electronics wholesales, seeks 
to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a "marketing and business development 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-IB 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 the Petitioner 
did not establish that the proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation. 
' The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director erred in 
denying the petition. 
Upon de novo 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: 
Matter of K- T- Inc. 
(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. 
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-1B petitiOn, the Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary will serve as a "marketing and 
business development analyst." In the initial letter of support, the Petitioner provided a general 
description of the job duties for the proffered position. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner provided a revised job 
description, along with the approximate percentage of time the Beneficiary will spend on each duty 
as follows: 
• Perform market research and analysis on several fronts to identify market 
inefficiencies specific to certain products and markets and use this knowledge 
to inform purchase and sales strategies. (20%) 
[The Beneficiary] will use his advanced knowledge in economics and finance 
to research and identify market opportunities based on imbalances between 
supply and demand in electronic pr~ducts in regional markets throughout of 
the globe. 
2 
Matter of K- T- Inc. 
• Conduct research into current and emerging electronic products, identifying 
expected trends in future demand. (20%) 
[The Beneficiary] will use his advanced knowledge of international business 
and finance to study manufacturing trends in "smart products" as well as his 
knowledge of marketing theory and practice to study current and emerging 
marketing of these products to identify promising product areas for the 
company to focus on commercial efforts. 
• Research suppliers of specific products, identify fruitful potential partners and 
present proposals for B2B partnerships. (15%) 
• Research and identify potential business customers and resellers and develop 
proposals for B2B partnerships. Analyze and forecast potential business sales 
by analyzing U.S. marketing strategies, performance and requirements for 
profitable relationships based on projections of price and volume. (15%) 
For both of the above two duties, [the Beneficiary] will use his knowledge of 
business organization and finance to analyze potential business partners on 
both the supply and sales sides to select robust organizations with which to 
develop commercial partnerships that will expand the company's markets. He 
will use the results of his research into emerging loT and market inefficiencies 
to inform this work and identify the most promising business partners to 
match our company's gr0wth strategies. 
• Research and analyze growth strategies, developing forecasts of financial 
costs on return on investment. ( 1 0%) 
[The Beneficiary] will use his advanced knowledge of marketing and finance 
to research and analyze prospective growth strategies and determine likely 
forecasts, identifying opportunities and risks for each. He will provide reports 
to the Operations Manager and the Owner with recommendations as to best 
options. 
• Develop negotiating strategies with emphasis on developing both supplier and 
customer relationships in China, which is quickly developing into the world's 
largest market. ( 1 0%) 
[The Beneficiary] will provide the Operations Manager with researched 
recommendations for negotiating with potential suppliers and commercial 
customers, with emphasis on Chinese-based businesses. This work requires 
3 
Matter of K-T- Inc. 
knowledge of business management, including operations management m 
order to understand and anticipate the concerns of all negotiating parties. 
• Enhance company's competitive strength by researching vertically integrated 
manufacturers in China and optimizing the value of products. (2%) 
• Assist the Operations Manager in driving business decisions and overseeing 
the progress of business development. (2%) 
• Represent the organization as prime external contact regarding issues of major 
importance to the organization. (2%) 
• Maintain good working relationships with ex1stmg clients previously to 
enhance client retention and new sales through referrals and references. (2%) 
• Manage and maintain the image and integrity of the company with our clients, 
consultants, and partners. (2%) 
According to the Petitioner, the position reqmres a bachelor's degree m marketing, business 
administration, or a closely related field. 
III. ANALYSIS 
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 qualifies as a specialty occupation. 1 
Specifically, the record does not establish that the job duties require an educational background, or 
its equivalent, commensurate with a specialty occupation? 
As stated above, 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. 
Here, the Petitioner's minimum educational requirement for the proffered position includes a 
general-purpose bachelor's degree in business administration. See Royal Siam Corp., 484 F.3d at 
147 (recognizing a business administration degree as a "general-purpose" degree). However, 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. !d. 
1 Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap, we will address each of the criteria individually. 
2 The Petitioner submitted documentation in support of the H-1 8 petition, including evidence regarding the proffered 
position and its business operations. Although we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and 
considered each one. 
4 
Matter of K-T- Inc. 
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 general or 
general-purpose degree, without further specification, does not establish the position as a specialty 
occupation. Id; c.f '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. 
Furthermore, we find that the evidence of the Petitioner's operations and the Beneficiary's stated 
duties undermines the Petitioner's assertion that the Beneficiary will be primarily performing the 
duties of a marketing and business development analyst. The Petitioner states that it has only two 
employees, the owner of the company and an operatiol1s manager. The Petitioner submits a 2015 
IRS Form 1120, U.S. Corporate Tax Return indicating that the company paid only $5000 in salaries 
and wages, and $10,000 to its officers during that year. This evidence leaves significant question as 
to whether the Petitioner employs the Beneficiary's claimed supervisor, the operations manager, an 
employee to which the Beneficiary will regularly provide reports and recommendations. Further, the 
company's overall lack of employees c suggests that the company has insufficient operational 
employees to support the Beneficiary in his proffered tole and indicates that the Beneficiary could be 
significantly engaged in the performance of these tasks. For instance, the Petitioner states that its 
revenue of over $3 million demonstrates that it is "actively engaged in the sale of goods and 
services." However, it is not clear who is handling the daily operational tasks inherent in selling 
these goods and services, such as accepting orders, issuing invoices, arranging for shipping, 
acquiring new clients, amongst other operational tasks. The Petitioner has not resolved these 
inconsistencies with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 
19 I&N Dec. 582,591-92 (BIA 1988). 
While no provision in the law for specialty occupations permits the performance of non-qualifying 
duties, we will view the performance of duties that are incidental3 to the primary duties of the 
proffered position as acceptable when they are unpredictable, intermittent, and of a minor 
nature. However, anything beyond such incidental duties, e.g., predictable, recurring, and 
substantive job responsibilities, must be specialty occupation duties or the proffered position as a 
whole cannot be approved as a specialty occupation. Assuming, arguendo, that the proffered 
position is in fact a marketing and business development analyst position, however, we will 
nevertheless perform a complete specialty occupation analysis under each of the four, alternative 
criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
3 The two definitions of "incidental" in Webster ·s 1\few College Dictionary 'are "1. Occurring or apt to occur as an 
unpredictable or minor concomitant ... [and] 2. Of a minor, casual, or subordinate nature .... " Incidental, Webster's 
lVew College Dictionary (3rd ed. 2008). 
5 
Matter of K-T- Inc. 
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 ofLabor'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.4 
On the labor condition application (LCA)5 submitted in support of the H-1B petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the occupational category "Market Research Analysts and 
Marketing Specialists" corresponding to the Standard Occupational Classification code 13-1161.6 
In pertinent part, the Handbook states that "[m]arket research analysts typically need a bachelor's 
degree in market research or a related field. Many have degrees in fields such as statistics, math, and 
computer science. Others have backgrounds in business administration, the social sciences, or 
communications." 7 
The Handbook does not indicate that a bachelor's degree in a spec?fic specialty, or the equivalent, is 
normally required for entry into this occupation. That is, while the Handbook states that market 
research analysts typically need a bachelor's degree in or related to market research, it also states 
that "[ m ]any" market research analysts have degrees in various other fields such as statistics, math, 
and computer science. Based on the various degrees which many research analysts can possess, the 
4 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 USC IS regularly reviews 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. 
5 The Petitioner is required to submit a certified LCA to USC IS 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 ofSimeio Solutions, LLC, 26 I&N Dec. 542, 545-546 (AAO 20 15). 
6 The Petitioner classified the proffered position at a Level I wage (the lowest of four assignable wage levels). 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 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 perfonn 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 will receive 
specific instructions on required tasks and expected results. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing 
Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http://flcdatacenter.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. 
7 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2016-17 ed., 
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/business-and-financial/print/market-research-analysts.htm (last visited Jan. II, 20 17). 
6 ' 
Matter of K-T- Inc. 
Handbook does not support the position's eligibility under the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). 
In general, provided the specialties are closely related, e.g., statistics and math, a minimum of a 
bachelor's or higher degree in more than one specialty is recognized as satisfying the "degree in the 
specific specialty" 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 degrees in disparate fields, such as market research and computer 
science, would not meet the statutory requirement that the degree be "in the specific specialty," 
unless the Petitioner establishes how each field is 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)( 1 )(b) of the Act (emphasis added).'8 The 
Petitioner has not done so here. 
Moreover, the Handbook indicates that general-purpose bachelor's degrees in business 
administration and the social sciences are acceptable for entry into the market research analyst 
occupation. This statement is consistent with the Petitioner's educational requirement for the 
proffered position, which includes a bachelor's degree in business administration. But again, a 
minimum requirement of a general-purpose bachelor's degree, such as a business administration 
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 147; cf Matter ofMichael Hertz Assocs., 
19 I&N Dec. at 560. 
In its appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director erroneously conflated the proffered position with 
the market research analyst occupational category, noting that his position of marketing and business 
development analyst is merely a subset of this occupational category, but not synonymous. In 
apparent conflict, the Petitioner points to the Handbook and the Occupational Information Network 
(O*NET) descriptions of market research analysts and contends that they establish that a bachelor's 
degree is required for the position. However, as noted, in order to establish a proffered position as 
specialty occupation the Petitioner must demonstrate not only that a bachelor's degree is required, 
but also that this degree must be in a specific specialty for minimum entry into the position. 
Although the O*NET description of market research analysts and marketing specialists indicates that 
the vast majority of those employed in these positions have a bachelor's degrees, it does not indicate 
that these positions require a degree in a specific specialty for entry. O*NET OnLine Summary 
8 Whether read with the statutory "the" or the regulatory "a," both readings denote a singular "specialty." Section 
214(i)(I)(B) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). Still, 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. As just stated, this also includes even seemingly disparate specialties provided the 
evidence of record establishes how each acceptable, specific field of study is directly related to the duties and 
responsibilities of the particular position. 
Matter of K-T- Inc. 
Report for "13-1161.00 Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists," 
http://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/13-11614.00 (last visited Jan. 11, 20 17). 
The Petitioner has not provided documentation from another probative source to substantiate its 
· assertions regarding the minimum requirement for entry into this particular position under this 
criterion.9 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 
individual with a degree[.]" 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong 
casts its gaze 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. 
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 affidavits 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)). 
Here and as already discussed, the Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one for 
which the Handbook (or other independent, authoritative source) reports an industry-wide requirement 
for at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. Thus, we incorporate by 
9 
On appeal, the Petitioner cites to Tapis lnt 'I v. INS, 94 F. Supp. 2d 172 (D. Mass. 2000), Residential Fin. Corp. v. U.S. 
Citizenship & Immigration Services, 839 F. Supp. 2d 985 (S.D. Ohio 20 12), Raj and Co. v. U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services, 85 F. Supp. 3d 1241 (W.O. Wash. 20 15), and Unical Aviation Inc. v. INS, 248 F. Supp. 2d 931 
(D.C. Cal. 2002) in support of its assertion that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. The Petitioner 
has furnished no evidence to establish that the facts of the instant petitio'n are analogous to those in these decisions. We 
also note that, in contrast to the broad precedential authority of the case law of a United States circuit court, we are not 
bound to follow the published decision of a United States district court in matters arising even within the same 
district. See Matter of K-S-, 20 I&N Dec. 715 (BIA 1993). Although the reasoning underlying a district judge's decision 
will be given due consideration when it is properly before us, the analysis does not have to be followed as a matter of 
law. !d. at 719. 
8 
Matter of K-T- Inc. 
reference the previous discussion on the matter. In addition, 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 t1rms "routinely employ and recruit only degreed 
individuals." Nor is there any other evidence relevant to this prong. Thus, based upon a complete 
review of the record of proceeding, we find that the Petitioner has not satisfied the first alternative prong 
of8 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 
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; howevervin the record of 
proceedings, 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) requires a petitioner to demonstrate that it 
normally requires a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, for the position. 
Upon review of the record, we find that the Petitioner did not submit information regarding 
employees who currently or previously held the position. The record does not establish that the 
Petitioner normally requires at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, 
directly related to the duties of the position. Therefore, the Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion 
at 8 C.F.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. 
Relative specialization and complexity have not been sufficiently developed by the Petitioner as an 
aspect of the proffered position's duties. In other words, the proposed duties have not been 
described with sufficient specificity to show that their nature is more specialized and complex than 
marketing and business development analyst positions whose. duties are not of a nature so 
9 
Matter ofK- T- Inc. 
specialized and complex that their performance requires knowledge usually associated with a degree 
in a specific specialty. In reviewing the record of proceedings under this criterion, we reiterate our 
earlier discussion regarding the Handbook's findings for positions located within the "Market 
Research Analysts" occupational category. Again, the Handbook does not indicate that a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty, or the equivalent, is a standard, minimum requirement to perform the 
duties of such positions (to the contrary, it indicates precisely the opposite), and the record indicates 
no factors that would elevate the duties proposed for the Beneficiary above those discussed for 
similar positions in the Handbook. With regard to the specific duties of the position proffered here, 
we find that the record of proceedings lacks sufficient, credible evidence establishing that they are so 
specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with the 
attainment of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or the 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 I position (the lowest of four assignable 
wage-levels) relative to others within the same occupational category. 10 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)(4). 
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 qualifies 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. Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of K-T-lnc., ID#186101 (AAO Jan. 12, 2017) 
10 
The Petitioner's designation of this position as a Level I, entry-level position undermines its claim that the position is 
particularly complex, specialized, or unique 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 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)( I) of the Act. 
10