dismissed H-1B Case: Ecommerce

(b)(6)
JUM 1 6 2015 
DATE: 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION RECEIPT#: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service> 
Administrative Appeals Office 
20 Massachusetts Ave .. N.W .. MS 2090 
Washington. DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section IOI(a)(IS)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § IIOI(a)(IS)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
Enclosed is the non-precedent decision ofthe Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) for your case. 
If you believe we incorrectly decided your case, you may file a motion requesting us to reconsider our 
decision and/or reopen the proceeding. The requirements for motions are located at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. 
Motions must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form 1-2908) within 33 days of the date of this 
decision. The Form I-290B web page (www.uscis.gov/i-290b) contains the latest information on fee, filing 
location, and other requirements. Please do not mail any motions directly to the AAO. 
Thank you, 
Ron Rosenberg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California Service Center, denied the petition. The matter is now 
before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 
On the Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (Form 1-129), the petitiOner describes itself as a 
three-employee "eCommerce" business established in 1 In order to employ the beneficiary in 
what it designates as a full-time "Sales Engineer" position at an annual salary of $68,120, the 
petitioner seeks to classify him as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to 
section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). 
The Director found the initial evidence insufficient to establish eligibility for the benefit sought, and 
issued a Request for Evidence (RFE). Thereafter, the petitioner responded to the Director's RFE. 
The Director denied the petition, finding that the evidence of record did not establish that the 
proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. The petitioner now files this appeal, asserting 
that the Director's decision was erroneous. 
We base our decision upon our review of the entire record of proceeding, which includes: (1) the 
petitioner's Form 1-129 and the supporting documentation filed with it; (2) the Director's RFE; (3) 
the petitioner's response to the RFE; ( 4) the Director's letter denying the petition; and (5) the 
petitioner's appeal and submissions on appeal. We reviewed the record in its entirety before issuing 
our decision. 2 
As will be discussed below, we have determined that the Director did not err in her decision to deny 
the petition on the specialty occupation issue. Accordingly, the Director's decision will not be 
disturbed. The appeal will be dismissed, and the petition will be denied. 
II. THE PROFFERED POSITION 
The Labor Condition Application (LCA) submit~ed to support the visa petitiOn states that the 
proffered position corresponds to Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code and occupation 
title 41-9031, Sales Engineers, from the Occupational Information Network (O*NET). The LCA 
further states that the proffered position is a Level I, entry-level, position. 
In a letter, dated March 25, 2014, submitted with the petition, the petitioner provided the following 
description about its business operations and the proffered position: 
1 
In the letter of support, dated March 25, 2014, which was submitted with the petition, the petitioner asserted 
that it has seven employees. 
2 We conduct appellate review on a de novo basis. See Soltane v. DOJ, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3d Cir. 2004). 
(b)(6)
Page 3 
NON-PRECEDENTDECL~ON 
[The petitioner] is an ambitious online retailer store, building and operating a network 
of niche market stores to serve the home improvement industry. We specialize in 
building state of the art niche stores in which customers can find a magnificent 
variety of niche products. We differentiate ourselves from Brick & Mortar stores and 
other online retailers by providing detailed and hard to find merchandises. 
[The petitioner] started in offering a new patent pending product called 
which is a vent cover that can be closed or opened using a wireless 
remote control. Besides we proudly cover numerous home improvement 
niches including air fans, filters, bathroom fixtures, kitchen fixtures, faucets, and 
lighting options. Our goal is to be the leading online company in the home 
improvement business by providing the best quality to our dear customers. Which is 
why we make sure to provide the latest designs of air registers to meet the demand in 
the market. 
Since 2010, [the petitioner] has demonstrated a dramatic increase in on-line visibility 
and revenue growth. Although we are a relatively small company with 7 employees 
now, we have big plans to expand our business and hire additional staff. By the end 
of 2014, our projected gross sales will be over $1 million. 
As a Sales Engineer, [the beneficiary] reports directly to the President and is 
responsible for online sales of our revolutionary products. His duties include 
developing product information, presenting technical product information to current 
and potential customers, identifying new home improvement products which meet 
our high quality standards, and assisting clients with problem-solving and technical 
inqumes. Ultimately, [the beneficiary] is responsible for making the sale by 
educating the customer of the many benefits of our amazing products. As our 
company grows and adds more sale [sic] staff, [the beneficiary] will lead the sales 
team to meet our goals. As an eCommerce company, our products are sold through 
multiple websites and online selling platforms. Consequently, [the beneficiary] is not 
required to travel to meet with customers as he communicates with them through 
various electronic methods. The minimum educational requirement for this position 
is a bachelor's degree in an engineering field or its equivalent. 
The petitioner provided additional explanations regarding the proffered position in response to the 
Director's RFE. In particular, the petitioner stated that the Sales Engineer "is responsible for the 
selling function of highly technical products" and "has many vital duties within the organization, 
mainly sourcing (1 0% ), qualifying ( 15% ), and selling complex and technologically-advanced home 
and building improvement products to both national and international clients (75%)." The petitioner 
further elaborated upon the duties of the proffered position, as follows: 
The duties of the Sales Engineer include the following: 
(b)(6)
Page 4 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
1. Sourcing out suppliers in the marketplace, who supply or manufacture products 
within the home and building improvement industry, communicating with a sales 
engineer at the other companies using technical language that both understand. 
2. Once suppliers are identified, the Sales Engineer has to evaluate and qualify the 
products from those suppliers based on the technical details of those products and 
based on his experience dealing with previous clients' needs. 
3. As an ecommerce organization, the Sales Engineer follows through with the 
online listing team at the company in order to ensure that highly advanced 
products are listed with the most accurate information in order to facilitate his 
main duties as Sales Engineer when potential clients first contact the company to 
request an order. 
4. After a client inquires about one of the many home and building products listed 
online, the Sales Engineer sets up a meeting with them either physically or 
virtually in order to present to them the features, specifications, operation, and 
maintenance of those products. 
In the same letter, the petitioner reaffirmed that the proffered position requires "a high technical 
acumen with a minimum of an engineering bachelor's degree." The petitioner further stated that 
[ d]ue to the many technical details that are related to mechanisms, efficiencies, and impact on the 
homes and buildings, a college degree is important in order to comprehend the complexity of the 
products and simplify the technicality of the data in order to convey it to clients in a more 
meaningful way." 
III. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION 
The issue is whether the petitioner has provided sufficient evidence to establish that it will employ 
the beneficiary in a specialty occupation position. 
A. Legal Framework 
To meet its burden of proof in establishing the proffered position as a specialty occupation, the 
petitioner must establish that the employment it is offering to the beneficiary meets the following 
statutory and regulatory requirements. 
Section 214(i)(l) ofthe Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1184(i)(l) defines the 
term "specialty occupation" as one that requires: 
(A) theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge, and 
(b)(6)
Page 5 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
(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 term "specialty occupation" is further defined at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) as: 
An occupation which requires [ (1)] theoretical and practical application of a body of 
highly specialized knowledge in fields of human endeavor including, but not limited 
to, architecture, engineering, mathematics, physical sciences, social sciences, 
medicine and health, education, business specialties, accounting, law, theology, and 
the arts, and which requires [(2)] the attainment of a bachelor's degree or higher in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent, as a minimum for entry into the occupation in the 
United States. 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty occupation, the position must 
meet one of the following criteria: 
(1) A baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry into the particular position; 
(2) The degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions 
among similar organizations or, in the alternative, an employer may show that 
its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only 
by an individual with a degree; 
(3) The employer normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the position; or 
(4) The nature of the specific duties [is] so specialized and complex that 
knowledge required to perform the duties is usually associated with the 
attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree. 
As a threshold issue, it is noted that 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) must logically be read together with 
section 214(i)(1) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). In other words, this regulatory language 
must be construed in harmony with the thrust of the related provisions and with the statute as a 
whole. See K Mart Corp. v. Cartier Inc., 486 U.S. 281, 291 (1988) (holding that construction of 
language which takes into account the design of the statute as a whole is preferred); see also COlT 
Independence Joint Venture v. Federal Sav. and Loan Ins. Corp., 489 U.S. 561 (1989); Matter C?fW­
F-, 21 I&N Dec. 503 (BIA 1996). As such, the criteria stated in 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) 
should logically be read as being necessary but not necessarily sufficient to meet the statutory and 
regulatory definition of specialty occupation. To otherwise interpret this section as stating the 
necessary and sufficient conditions for meeting the definition of specialty occupation would result 
in particular positions meeting a condition under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) but not the statutory 
or regulatory definition. See Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). To avoid this 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 6 
result, 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) must therefore be read as providing supplemental criteria that 
must be met in accordance with, and not as alternatives to, the statutory and regulatory definitions of 
specialty occupation. 
As such and consonant with section 214(i)(l) of the Act and the regulation at 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii), USCIS consistently interprets the term "degree" in the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)( A) to mean not just any baccalaureate or higher degree, but one in a specific 
specialty that is directly related to the proffered position. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 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"). Applying this standard, 
USCIS regularly approves H -1 B petitions for qualified aliens who are to be employed as engineers, 
computer scientists, certified public accountants, college professors, and other such occupations. 
These professions, for which petitioners have regularly been able to establish a minimum entry 
requirement in the United States of a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty or its 
equivalent directly related to the duties and responsibilities of the particular position, fairly represent 
the types of specialty occupations that Congress contemplated when it created the H-1 B visa 
category. 
To determine whether a particular job qualifies as a specialty occupation, USCIS does not rely 
simply upon a proffered position's title. The specific duties of the position, combined with the 
nature of the petitioning entity's business operations, are factors to be considered. USCIS must 
examine the ultimate employment of the beneficiary, and determine whether the position qualifies 
as a specialty occupation. See generally Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F. 3d at 384. The critical 
element is not the title of the position nor an employer's self-imposed standards, but whether 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 as the 
minimum for entry into the occupation, as required by the Act. 
B. Analysis 
We find that the evidence of record does not demonstrate that the proffered position is a sales 
engineer position. We make this finding primarily based upon the lack of sufficient information and 
evidence regarding the duties of the proffered position. 
According to the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL's) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) 
sub-chapter on "What Sales Engineers Do," "[s]ales engineers sell complex scientific and 
technological products or services to businesses" and "specialize in technologically and 
scientifically advanced products." 3 U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational 
3 We recognize the Handbook as an authoritative source on the duties and educational requirements of the wide 
variety of occupations that it addresses. The Handbook, which is available in printed form, may also be 
accessed on the Internet, at http://www.bls.gov/oco/. All of our references to the Handbook are to the 2014-
2015 edition available online. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENTDEC§JON 
Page 7 
Outlook Handbook (Handbook), 2014-15 ed., "Sales Engineers," http://www.bls.gov/ooh/sales/ 
sales-engineers.htm#tab-2 (last visited June 4, 2015).4 
Here, there is insufficient evidence in the record to establish that the products the petitioner sells are 
technologically and scientifically advanced and complex, the selling of which require a technical 
background equivalent to a baccalaureate degree in engineering. For instance, the petitioner stated 
that it sells a "new patent pending product called ' which is a that can be closed 
or opened using a wireless remote control." However, the petitioner did further elaborate on the 
technical or scientific features of the " and the particular bodies of knowledge required to 
sell this product. The fact that a product is patent pending, alone, does not establish that the product 
is also technologically or scientifically advanced and complex such that a baccalaureate degree in 
engineering is necessary to sell them. 
Similarly, the petitioner stated that it also offers "numerous home improvement niches including air 
fans, filters, bathroom fixtures, kitchen fixtures, faucets, and lighting options." Again, however, the 
petitioner has not elaborated on the technical or scientific aspects of these home improvement 
products and the associated knowledge required to sell them. It is not readily apparent that home 
improvement products such as bathroom and kitchen fixtures can be considered technically or 
scientifically advanced and complex, even if they are "niche" or "hard to find," as claimed, and that 
a bachelor's degree in engineering would be required to sell such products. The petitioner also 
asserts that it sells "building improvement products" but has not further explained or provided 
examples illuminating the nature of these "building improvement products." 
The petitioner also states that "(t]his is not a typical sales position; the requirement of an 
engineering degree demonstrates that theoretical application of specialized knowledge, i.e. 
engineering principles, is required for this position." The petitioner makes other claims regarding 
the "high technical acumen" and engineering knowledge required for this position. However, as 
mentioned above, the petitioner has not sufficiently explained and documented the factual bases for 
its assertions. That is, the petitioner has not specifically identified what particular aspects of the 
petitioner's products are technically or scientifically advanced, what bodies of highly specialized 
knowledge are associated with these products, which particular courses of study provided such 
knowledge, and how these courses represent an established curriculum leading to a baccalaureate or 
higher degree in engineering. 5 As such, these are conclusory statements that have little to no 
4 Likewise, the O*NET OnLine Details Report for the occupation "Sales Engineers" states that they "[s]ell 
business goods or services, the selling of which requires a technical background equivalent to a baccalaureate 
degree m engineering." O*NET Details Report, 41-9031.00, Sales Engineers, 
http://www.onetonline.org/link/details/41-9031.00 (last visited June 4, 20 15). O*NET further lists one of the 
core duties of sales engineers as to "[s]ell products requiring extensive technical expertise and support for 
installation and use, such as material handling equipment, numerical-control machinery, and computer 
systems." !d. 
5 A petitioner's perfunctory declaration of a particular educational requirement will not mask the fact that the 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 8 
probative value. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for 
purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Soffzci, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 
165 (Comm'r 1998) (citing Matter ofTreasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm'r 
1972)). 
The petitioner highlights the fact that it is an "online marketplace" or "eCommerce company which 
does not maintain product inventory," and as such, it "must rely on its Sales Engineer to identify 
existing products on the market which will meet the customers' needs or can be easily adapted." 
The petitioner's assertions are unpersuasive. The petitioner has not sufficiently explained the 
significance of its online sales and lack of inventory, and how these aspects of the petitioner's 
operations set it apart from other "brick and mortar" home improvement stores. Nor has the 
petitioner sufficiently explained how the proffered duties of researching, evaluating, and identifying 
existing products to meet customers' needs distinguish the proffered position from other sales 
positions which may not necessarily require at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. 6 
As stated in the Handbook, "many of the duties of sales engineers are similar to those of other 
salespersons." U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook 
(Handbook), 2014-15 ed., "Sales Engineers," http://www.bls.gov/oohlsales/ sales­
engineers.htm#tab-2 (last visited June 4, 20 15). Thus, even though the duties of the proffered 
position may be generally similar to the duties of sales engineers, this similarity is not determinative 
here. Instead, in assessing whether the proffered position appropriately falls within the sales 
engineers occupational classification, we primarily consider the technical or scientific nature and 
complexity of the products being sold by the petitioner. The evidence of record does not contain 
sufficient information and evidence with respect to the nature of the petitioner's products. There are 
position is not a specialty occupation. USCIS must examine the actual employment requirements, and, on the 
basis of that examination, determine whether the position qualifies as a specialty occupation. See generally 
Defensor v. Meissner, 20 I F. 3d 384. Were USC IS limited solely to reviewing a petitioner's claimed self­
imposed requirements, then any individual with a bachelor's degree could be brought to the United States to 
perform any occupation as long as the petitioner artificially created a token degree requirement, even if the 
proffered position did not, in fact, require such a specialty degree or its equivalent. See id. at 388. 
6 For example, the Handbook describes retail sales workers as including "both those who sell retail 
merchandise ... and those who sell spare and replacement parts and equipment . . . . Both types of workers 
help customers find the products they want." U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational 
Outlook Handbook, 2014-15 ed., "Retail Sales Workers," http://www.bls.gov/ooh/sales/retail-sales­
workers.htm#tab-2 (last visited June 4, 2015). The Handbook further states that retail sales workers 
"[t]ypically ... do not need a formal education," although "some employers prefer applicants who have a 
high school diploma or equivalent, especially those who sell technical products or 'big-ticket' items, such as 
electronics or cars." Jd. at http://www.bls.gov/ooh/sales/retail-sales-workers.htm#tab-4 (last visited June 4, 
2015). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 9 
no brochures of the petitioner's products, invoices, technical specifications, catalogs, website 
printouts, etc., in the record corroborating the petitioner's claims that it sells complex scientific and 
technological products or services. 
The record is devoid of substantial documentary evidence as to the specific duties of the proffered 
pos1t10n. Given the lack of detail and corroborating evidence, we cannot determine that the 
proffered position substantially reflects the duties of a sales engineer. We note that the petitioner 
stated that the beneficiary's "duties include developing product information" and "presenting 
technical product information"; however, the record is devoid of any product information to be 
developed and presented. 
We also consider the lack of information about the petitioner's customers in finding that the 
petitioner has not established that the sales engineers occupational classification is appropriate for 
the proffered position. The Handbook specifically states that "[s]ales engineers sell complex 
scientific and technological products or services to businesses (emphasis added)." !d. 7 In the instant 
matter, the petitioner has not clarified who its primary customers are (i.e., whether they are 
individuals or businesses), or where they are located (i.e., whether they are at commercial, 
industrial, or other business establishments). Without sufficient evidence regarding the nature of the 
petitioner's products and its customers, we cannot find that the proffered position is a sales engineer 
position. 
Based on the lack of documentary evidence, we have also determined that the petitioner has not 
distinguished the proffered position from a position that does not quality as a specialty occupation. 
There is insufficient basis upon which it can be determined that the petitioner has demonstrated a need 
for a sales engineer and that the beneficiary will be performing the claimed duties of a sales engineer on 
a full-time basis. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for 
purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Sofjici, 22 I&N Dec. 15 8, 
165 (Comm'r 1998) (citing Matter o.fTreasure Craft o.fCalifornia, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm'r 
1972)). Furthermore, doubt cast on any aspect of the petitioner's proof may, of course, lead to a 
reevaluation of the reliability and sufficiency of the remaining evidence offered in support of the 
visa petition. Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591 (BIA 1988). 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iv) provides that "[a]n H-1B petition involving a specialty 
occupation shall be accompanied by [d]ocumentation ... or any other required evidence sufficient 
to establish . . . that the services the beneficiary is to perform are in a specialty occupation." 
Furthermore, there must be sufficient, corroborating evidence in the record that demonstrates not 
only actual, non-speculative employment for the beneficiary, but also enough details and specificity 
to establish that the work the beneficiary will perform for the petitioner will more likely than not be 
7 
By the same token, O*NET states that sale engineers "[s]ell business goods or services." O*NET Details 
Report, 41-9031.00, Sales Engineers, http://www.onetonline.org/link/details/41-9031.00 
(last visited June 4, 
2015) (emphasis added). In addition, O*NET lists one of the core duties of sales engineers as to "[v]isit 
prospective buyers at commercial, industrial, or other establishments." !d. (emphasis added). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 10 
in a specialty occupation. While the petitioner provided descriptions of the proffered position's 
claimed duties, there is insufficient evidence in the record that the petitioner, a small three or seven 
employee firm, requires a full-time sales engineer requiring the "theoretical and practical application 
of a body of highly specialized knowledge" to perform these claimed duties on a full-time basis. See 
INA§ 214(i)(l). 
Consequently, we cannot find that the petitioner has adequately established the substantive nature of 
the proffered position. The failure to establish the substantive nature of the work to be performed 
by the beneficiary precludes a finding that the proffered position satisfies any criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), because it is the substantive 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. 
Accordingly, as the petitioner has not established that it has satisfied any of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 
214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), it cannot be found that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
The appeal will be dismissed and the petition denied for this reason. 
C. Opinion Letter 
We will now briefly address why we accord little probative weight to the letter from Dr. 
Professor of Civil Engineering, which states that "[the petitioner's] job description clearly 
indicates that [the beneficiary] will be performing duties and responsibilities of a Sale [sic] 
Engineer. "8 
Professor attested that "[a]s a relatively small company which specializes in 'hard to find' 
building and home improvement products, [the petitioner] will rely heavily on its Sales Engineers." 
Professor further attested that "an eCommerce company which does not maintain product 
inventory, [the petitioner] must rely on its Sales Engineers to identify existing products on the 
market which will meet the customers' needs or can be easily adapted." Professor concluded 
that "[o]nly someone with an engineering background could comprehend which products will meet 
the technical requirements and/or communicate with customers about options for adapting the 
products for each customer's particular needs." 
However, Professor did not sufficiently explain the factual bases for his conclusions. 
Professor did not elaborate upon the nature and technological complexity of the particular 
8 Dr. was the primary engineering advisor for the beneficiary during his undergraduate studies at the 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 11 
products being sold by the petitioner, so as to establish that these products require someone with an 
engineering background. Professor also did not articulate why the petitioner's specialization 
in "'hard to find' building and horne improvement products" or its characteristic as an "eCornrnerce 
company which does not maintain product inventory" renders the Sales Engineer occupational 
classification appropriate for the proffered position. As discussed above, the 
record contains 
insufficient corroborating evidence regarding the claims that the petitioner is engaged in such 
activities and that the beneficiary will perform the claimed duties. As such, Professor : letter 
contains conclusory statements that are not entitled to probative value. 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. at 165. 
For these reasons, we conclude that the professor's findings and his ultimate conclusions are of limited 
evidentiary value in this proceeding. We may, in our discretion, use as advisory opinion statements 
submitted as expert testimony. However, where an opinion is not in accord with other information 
or is in any way questionable, we are not required to accept or may give less weight to that 
evidence. Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791 (Comm'r 1988). 
IV. CONCLUSION 
The evidence of record does not establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty 
occupation. Accordingly, the petition will be denied and the appeal disrnissed.7 
In visa petition proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration 
benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter ofOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 
(BIA 2013). Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
7 As this issue precludes approval of the petition, we will not address any of the additional deficiencies we 
have identified on appeal.