dismissed H-1B Case: Education

(b)(6)
FEB 0 6 2015 
DATE: 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
OFFICE: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. 
This is a non-precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish agency 
policy through non-precedent decisions. If you believe the AAO incorrectly applied current law or policy to 
your case or if you seek to present new facts for consideration, you may file a motion to reconsider or a 
motion to reopen, respectively. Any motion must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) 
within 33 days of the date of this decision. Please review the Form I-290B instructions at 
http://www.uscis.gov/forms for the latest information on fee, filing location, and other requirements. 
See also 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Thank you, 
,;b�� 
�Zen berg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.usds.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director (hereinafter "director") denied the nonimmigrant visa 
petition, and the matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The 
appeal will be dismissed. The petition will be denied. 
I. PR OCEDU RAL AND FACTUAL BACKG ROUND 
On the Form I-12 9 visa petition, the petitioner describes itself as a 50- employee "Da y Care Center " 
established in In order to employ the beneficiary in what it designates as a "Pre-School 
Teacher" position, 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. § 11 01 (a)(15) (H)(i)(b). 
The director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner failed to establish that it would employ 
the beneficiary in a specialty occupation position, and finding that the petitioner had not established 
that the beneficiary maintained legal status in the United States. 
On appeal, counsel asserted that the director's finding pertinent to the specialty occupation issue was 
incorrect, and contended that the petitioner satisfied all evidentiary requirements in that regard. As 
to the maintenance of status issue, counsel stated: 
The Service erred in not finding that the beneficiary had been gainfully 
employed by the petitioner from which he last obtained H-lB non immigrant 
status. 
We submit that the Letter confirmation from the previous employer is sufficient to 
prove the last employment of the beneficiary with the petitioner from which he last 
obtained the H-lB non immigrant status. 
In any event, we respectfully submit that the beneficiary's alleged failure to maintain 
a valid H -lB status, even if true, is not a ground for the denial of the petition. Such 
failure to maintain valid status could admittedly be a ground for denial of the 
application for the extension of stay of the beneficiary, but not of the petition. 
Considering that the petitioner has sufficiently established that the proffered position 
is a specialty occupation, the Service should have approved the petition and simply 
directed the beneficiary to pick-up the H-lB visa abroad. 
II. WITHD RAWAL OF THE MAINTE NANC E OF STATUS ISSUE 
We find that counsel is correct that the issue of the beneficiary's maintenance of status is not a basis 
for denying the visa petition and we withdraw that basis of denial. As the beneficiary's maintenance 
of legal status in the United States is not relevant to the approvability of the instant visa petition, we 
need not reach the factual issue of whether the petitioner demonstrated that the beneficiary 
maintained legal status in the United States. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 3 
III. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION ISSU E 
The remaining issue before us is whether the petitioner has demonstrated that the proffered position 
qualifies as a specialty occupation. 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. 
We base our decision upon our review of the entire record of proceeding, which includes: (1) the 
petitioner's Form I-129 and the supporting documentation filed with it; (2) the service center's 
request for additional evidence (R FE); (3) the petitioner's response to the RFE; ( 4) the director's 
denial letter; and (5) the Form I-290B and counsel's submissio ns on appeal. 
A. THE LAW 
Section 214( i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 11 84(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) states, in pertinent part, the following: 
Specialty occupation means an occupation which [(1)] requires 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 [(2)] requires 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.P. R. § 214.2( h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty occupation, a proposed position must 
also meet one of the following criteria: 
(1) A baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the mmllllum 
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 
(b)(6)
Page 4 
NON-P RECEDENT DECISION 
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. § 21 4.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) must logically be read together 
with section 21 4(i)(l) of the Act and 8 C.P.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. SeeK Mart Corp. v. Cartier, Inc., 486 U.S. 281, 291 (1 988) (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 ofW­
F-, 21 I&N Dec. 503 (BIA 19 96). 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 
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) (1) of the Act and the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(ii), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (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-lB 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-lB visa category. 
To determine whether a particular job qualifies as a specialty occupation, USCIS does not simply 
rely on a position's title. The specific duties of the proffered 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 alien, and determine whether the position qualifies as a specialty 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 5 
occupation. See generally Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F. 3d 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. 
IV. EVIDENCE 
The Labor Condition Application (LCA) submitted to support the visa petition states that the 
proffered pos ition is a "Group Teacher" position, and that it corresponds to Standard Occupational 
Classification (SOC) code and title 25-2011, Preschool Teachers, Except Special Education from the 
Occupational Information Ne twork (O*NET). The LCA further states that the proffered position is 
a Level I, entry-level, pos ition. 
With the visa petition, counsel submitted evidence that the beneficiary studied at in 
the Philippines. Counsel also submitted a public school teacher certificate issued to the beneficiary 
by the Education Department. The Certification Area 
designated on the certificate is "Early Childhood Education (Birth-Grade 2). 
On January 27, 2014, the service center issued an RFE in this matter. The service center requested, 
inter alia, evidence that the petitioner would employ the beneficiary in a specialty occupation. The 
service center provided a non-exhaustive list of items that might be used to satisfy the specialty 
occupation requirements. 
In response, counsel submitted: (1 ) evidence pertinent to the educational credentials of three people 
other than the beneficiary; and (2) a letter, dated April 15 , 2014, from the petitioner's 
executive director. 
The evidence submitted ]:Jertinent to the educational credentials of people other than the beneficiary 
shows that received a bachelor's degree in elementary education from the 
in the Philippines; received a bachelor's degree from the 
received a 
bachelor's degree from in the Philippines; 
A.pril15 , 2014 letter contains the following duty description: 
1. Teach pre-school pupils academic, social and manipulative skills in private 
education system- 30%. 
2. Prepare lesson plan and teaching outline for course of study, lecture, demonstrate 
and use audiovisual teaching aids to present subject matters to class-30%. 
3. Instructs children in activities designed to promote social, physical and 
intellectual growth needed for primary school- 5%. 
4. Prepare, administer and correct assessments and record result- 10%. 
(b)(6)
Page 6 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
5. Assign lessons, correct papers and hear oral presentations-5%. 
6. Discuss pupil's academic and behavior problems with parents and suggest 
remedial action-S%. 
7. Keep attendance and grade records -5%. 
8. Plans individual and group activities to stimulate growth in language & literacy, 
social and emotional, cognitive & approaches to learning-10% 
That letter further states: 
In our School all of our Group Teachers have a minimum of a Bachelor's degree e.g., 
to name 
a few. The complexity of the job offered requires the services of a person who is a 
holder of baccalaureate degree in Education to perform in this specialty occupation of 
Group Teacher. The requirement of a Bachelor's degree is a minimum requirement in 
our School and certainly it is also the standard minimum requirement in New York 
State. 
The director denied the petition on June 2, 2014, finding, as was noted above, that the petitioner had 
not demonstrated that the proffered position qualifies as a position in a specialty occupation by 
virtue of requiring a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. More 
specifically, the director found that the petitioner had satisfied none of the supplemental criteria set 
forth at 8 C. P.R. § 21 4.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A). 
On appeal, counsel submitted three vacancy announcements posted by other schools and a brief. In 
the brief, counsel asserted that the proffered position had been shown to be so complex that it can be 
performed only by an individual with a degree in a specific specialty and that the petitioner had 
demonstrated that it normally requires a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a speci fic specialty or its 
equivalent for the proffered position. 
Counsel also cited a non-precedent AAO decision for the proposition that "teachers are considered 
professionals if 'required to have a probationary certification and a degree in any academic major 
with the completion of specialized courses and teacher training."' 
V. ANAL YSIS 
Initially, we observe that counsel's reference to AAO non-precedent decisions has no persuasive 
impact. While 8 C.F.R. § 10 3.3(c) provides that USCIS precedent decisions are binding on all 
USCIS employees in the administration of the Act, unpublished decisions are not similarly binding. 
To determine whether the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation position, we turn 
first to the criteria at 8 C.P.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(A) (l) and (2): a baccalaureate or higher degree in a 
specific specialty or its equivalent is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the particular 
position; and a degree requirement in a specific specialty is common to the industry in parallel 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 7 
positions among similar organizations or a particular position is so complex or unique that it can be 
performed only by an individual with a degree in a specific specialty. Factors we consider when 
determining these criteria include: whether the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Outlook 
Handbook (Handbook), on which we routinely rely for the educational requirements of particular 
occupations, reports the industry requires a degree in a specific specialty; whether the industry's 
professional association has made a degree in a specific specialty 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 de greed individuals." See Shanti, Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151, 1165 
(D. Minn. 1999) (quoting Hird/Blaker C01p. v. Sava, 712 F. Supp. 1095, 1102 (S. D.N. Y. 1989)). 
We will first address the requirement under 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l): A baccalaureate or 
higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the particular 
position. We recognize the Handbook as an authoritative source on the duties and educational 
requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses. 1 The petitioner claims in the LCA 
that the proffered position corresponds to SOC code and title 25-2011, Preschool Teachers, Except 
Special Education from O*NET. The Handbook describes the occupation of "Preschool Teachers " 
as follows: 
What Preschool Teachers Do 
Preschool teachers educate and care for children, usually ages 3 to 5, who have not 
yet entered kindergarten. They teach reading, writing, science, and other subjects in a 
way that young children can understand. 
Duties 
Preschool teachers typically do the following: 
• Prepare children for kindergarten by introducing concepts they will 
explore further in kindergarten and elementary school 
• Work with children in groups or one on one, depending on the needs 
of children and the subject matter 
• Plan and carry out a curriculum that targets diff erent areas of child 
development, such as language, motor, and social skills 
• Organize activities so children can learn about the world, explore 
interests, and develop talents 
• Develop schedules and routines to ensure children have enough 
physical activity, rest, and playtime 
• Watch for signs of emotional or developmental problems in children 
and bring problems to the attention of parents 
The Handbook, which is available in printed form, may also be accessed on the Internet, at 
http://www.bls.gov/oco/. Our references to the Handbook are to the 2014- 2015 edition available online. 
(b)(6)
Page 8 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
• Keep records of the stu dents' progress, routines, and interests, and 
keep parents informed about their child's development 
Young children learn from playing, problem solving, questioning, and experimenting. 
Preschool teachers use play and other instructional techniques to teach children about 
the world. For example, they use storytelling and rhyming games to teach language 
and vocabulary. They may help improve children's social skills by having them work 
together to build a neighborhood in a sandbox or teach math by having children count 
when building with blocks. 
Preschool teachers work with children from different ethnic, racial, and religious 
backgrounds. Teachers include topics in their lessons to teach children to respect 
people of different backgrounds and cultures. 
U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 201 4-15 ed., 
"Preschool Teachers, " http://www.bls.gov/ooh/education-training-and-library/preschool­
teachers. htm#tab-2 (last visited Feb. 4, 2015). 
The duties attributed to the proffered position in April 15, 2014 letter are consistent 
with the duties of pres chool teachers as described in the Handbook. On the balance, we find that the 
proffered pos ition is a preschool teacher position as described in the Handbook. 
The Handbook states the following about the educational requirements of pres chool teacher 
positions: 
How to Become a Preschool Teacher 
Education and training requirements vary based on settings and state regulations. 
They range from a high sc hool diploma and certification to a college degree. 
Education 
In childcare centers, pres chool teachers generally are required to have a least a high 
school diploma and a certification in early childhood education. However, employers 
may prefer to hire workers with at least some postse condary education in early 
childhood education. 
Preschool teachers in Head Start programs are required to have at least an ass ociate's 
degree. However, at least 50 percent of all pres chool teachers in Head Start programs 
nationwide must have a bachelor's degree in early childhood education or a related 
field. Those with a degree in a related field must have experience teaching preschool­
age children. 
(b)(6)
Page 9 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISI01 
In public schools, preschool teachers are generally required to have at least a 
bachelor's degree in early childhood education or a related field. Bachelor's degree 
programs teach students about children's development, strategies to teach young 
children, and how to observe and document children's progress. 
Licenses, Certifications, and Registrations 
Many states require childcare centers, including those in private homes, to be 
licensed. To qualify for licensure, staff must pass a background check, have a 
complete record of immunizations, and meet a minimum training requirement. Some 
states require staff to have certifications in CPR and first aid. 
Some states and employers require childcare workers to have a nationally recognized 
certification. Most often, states require the Child Development Associate (CDA) 
certification offered by the Council for Professional Recognition. Obtaining the CDA 
certification requires coursework, experience in the field, a written exam, and 
observation of the candidate working with children. 
Some states recognize the Child Care Professional (CCP) designation offered by the 
Nati onal Early Childhood Program Accreditation. Candidates for the CCP must be 18 
years old, have a high school diploma, experience in the field, take courses in early 
childhood education, and pass an exam. 
In public schools, preschool teachers must be licensed to teach early childhood 
education, which covers preschool through third grade. Requirements vary by state, 
but they generally require a bachelor's degree and passi ng an exam to demonstrate 
competency. Most states require teachers to complete continuing education credits to 
maintain their license. 
Other Experience 
A few states require preschool teachers to have some work experience in a childcare 
setting. The amount of experience necessary varies by state. In these cases, preschool 
teachers often start out as childcare workers or teacher assistants. 
Important Qualities 
Communication skills. Preschool teachers need good communication skills to tell 
parents and colleagues about students' progress. They need good writing and speaking 
skills to convey this information effectively. They must also be able to communicate 
well with small children. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDE NT DECISIOJii 
Page 10 
Creativity. Preschool teachers must plan lessons that engage young students. In 
addition, they need to adapt their lessons to suit different learning styles. 
Interpersonal skills. Preschool teachers must understand children's emotional needs 
and be able to develop good relationships with parents, children, and colleagues. 
Organizational skills. Teachers need to be organized to plan lessons and keep records 
of their students. 
Patience. Working with children can be frustrating, and preschool teachers should be 
able to respond calmly to overwhelming and difficult situations. 
Physical stamina. Working with children can be physically taxing, so preschool 
teachers should have a lot of energy. 
Advancement 
Experienced preschool teachers can advance to become the director of a preschool or 
childcare center or a lead teacher, who may be responsible for the instruction of 
several classes. Those with a bachelor's degree in early childhood education 
frequently are qualified to teach kindergarten through grade 3, in addition to 
preschool. Teaching positions at these higher grades typically pay more. For more 
information, see the profiles on preschool and childcare center directors and 
kindergarten and elementary school teachers. 
!d. at http://www .bls.gov /ooh/education-training-and-library /preschool-teachers.htm#tab-4 (last 
visited Feb. 4, 2015). 
The Handbook contains no indication that a baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is 
normally the minimu m requirement for entry into the particular position offered in this case. 
Although it states that some preschool teacher positions require a bachelor's degree, or even a 
bachelor's degree in early childhood education, it makes equally clear that other preschool positions 
do not require a specialized bachelor's degree, or even a minimum of any bachelor's degree at all. It 
states, "In childcare centers, preschool teachers generally are required to have a least a high school 
diploma and a certification in early childhood education. " It further states that requirements for 
certification include a high school diploma, experience in the field, and coursework, but does not 
suggest that certification is the equivalent of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. 
Where, as here, the Handbook does not support the proposition that the proffered position satisfies 
this first criterion of 8 C. P.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(A), it is incumbent upon the petitioner to provide 
persuasive evidence that the proffered position otherwise satisfies this criterion by a preponderance 
of the evidence standard, notwithstanding the absence of the Handbook's su pport on the issue. In 
such a case, it is the petitioner's responsibility to provide probative evidence (e.g. , documentation 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECIS/Ofv 
Page 11 
from other authoritative sources) that supports a favorable finding with regard to this criterion. 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." 
On this point, Sheila Willard asserted, in her April 15 , 2014 letter, that the "requirement of a 
Bachelor's degree is a minimum requirement in our School and certainly it is also the standard 
minimum requirement in New York State." However, there is insufficient evidence in the record to 
demonstrate that the state of New York requires a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty for the 
proffered position. We note that the New York regulations on "Child Day Care Services " do not 
state a requirement of a bachelor's degree for ''Head of Group for Preschoolers" positions. See N. Y. 
Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 18 § 418-1. 13 (2014 ). Further, while the petitioner asserts that it 
requires a "baccalaureate degree in Education," it has failed to sufficiently demonstrate why it needs 
a group teacher with a bachelor's degree in education when the state does not require such 
qualifications. 
The record of proceeding does not contain any persuasive documentary evidence from any relevant 
authoritative source establishing that the proffered position's inclusion in this occupational category 
would be sufficient in and of itself to establish that a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent "is normally the minimum requirement for entry into [this] particular 
position." 
Further, we find that, to the extent that they are described in the record of proceeding, the numerous 
duties that the petitioner ascribes to the proffered position indicate a need for a range of knowledge, 
but do not establish any particular level of formal, postsecondary education leading to a bachelor's 
or higher degree in a specific specialty as minimally necessary to attain such knowledge. 
As the evidence of record does not establish that the particular pos ition here proffered is one for 
which the normal minimum entry requirement is a baccalaureate or higher degree, or the equivalent, 
in a specific specialty, the petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.P.R. 
§ 214. 2(h)(4) (iii)(A)(l). 
Next, we find that the petitioner has not satisfied the first of the two alternative prongs of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 21 4.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). This prong alternatively calls for a petitioner to establish that a requirement 
of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common for positions 
that are identifiable as being (1) in the petitioner's industry, (2) parallel to the proffered position, and 
also (3) located in organizations that are similar to the petitioner. 
In determining whether there is a commo n degree requirement, factors often considered by USCIS 
include: whether the Handbook reports that the industry requires a degree; whether the industry's 
professional associatio n 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 
(b)(6)
NON-PR ECEDENT DECISION 
Page 12 
recruit only degreed individuals." See Shanti) Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d at 116 5 (quoting 
Hird/Blaker Corp. v. Sava, 71 2 F. Supp. at 1102. 
In the instant case, the petitioner has not established that the proffered position falls under an 
occupational category for which the Handbook, or other reliable and authoritative source, indicates 
that there is a standard, minimum entry requirement of at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent. 
Also, there are no submissi ons from professio nal associations, individuals, or similar firms in the 
petitioner's industry attesting that individuals employed in positions parallel to the proffered position 
are routinely required to have a mi nimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its 
equivalent for entry into those positions. 
As was noted above, counsel did provide three vacancy announcements. They are for positions 
entitled Preschool Teacher and Pre-K Lead Teacher. Initially, we observe that the proffered position 
is designated a Level I Preschool Teacher position, which indicates that it is an entry-level position 
for an employee who has only basic understanding of the occupation. In order to attempt to show 
that parallel positions require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its 
equivalent, the petitioner would be obliged to demonstrate that other Level I preschool teacher 
positions, entry-level positions requiring only a basic understanding of the job of preschool teacher, 
require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. The job title "Lead 
Teacher," however, suggests that position may be a higher level position. As such, the Pre-K Lead 
Teacher position has not been shown to be a position parallel to the proffered position. 
Further, even if all three vacancy announcements were for parallel posit ions with organizations 
similar to the petitioner and in the petitioner's industry and required a minimum of a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate what 
statistically valid inferences, if any, can be drawn from three announcements with regard to the 
comm on educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations. 2 
Thus, the evidence of record does not establish that a requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in 
a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common to positions that are (1 ) in the petitioner's industry, 
(2) parallel to the proffered position, and also (3) located in organizations that are similar to the 
petitioner. 
The evidence of record also does not satisfy the second alternative prong of 8 C.P.R. 
§ 21 4.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2), which provides that "an employer may show that its particular position is so 
2 users "must examine each piece of evidence for relevance, probative value, and credibility, both 
individually and within the context of the totality ofthe evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven 
is probably true." Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). In this case, the petitioner failed 
to demonstrate what inferences, if any, can be drawn from these few job postings with regard to determining 
the common educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations in the same 
industry. See generally Earl Babbie, The Practice of Social Research 186-228 (1995). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 13 
complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with a degree. " A review of the 
record indicates that the petitioner has failed to credibly demonstrate that the duties that comprise the 
proffered position entail such complexity or uniqueness as to constitute a position so complex or 
unique that it can be performed only by a person with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty. 
Specifically, the petitioner failed to demonstrate how the duties that collectively constitute the 
proffered position require the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge such that a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific speci alty, or its equivalent, is 
required to perform them. For instance, the petitioner did not submit information relevant to a 
detailed course of study leading to a specialty degree and did not establish how such a curriculum is 
necessary to perform the duties of the proffered position. While a few related courses may be 
beneficial, or even required, in performing certain duties of the proffered position, the petitioner has 
failed to demonstrate 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 
particular position here. 
Further, as was also noted above, the LCA submitted in support of the visa petition is approved for a 
Level I preschool teacher, an indication that the proffered position is an entry-level position for an 
employee who has only a basic understanding of teaching preschool children. This does not support 
the proposition that the proffered position is so complex or unique that it can only be performed by a 
person with a specific bachelor's degree, especially as the Handbook suggests that som e preschool 
teacher positions do not require such a degree. 
Therefore, the evidence of record does not establish that this position is significantly different from 
other positions in the occupation such that it refutes the Handbook's information to the effect that 
there is a spectrum of degrees acceptable for such positions, including degrees not in a specific 
specialty, and that some such positions require no college degree at all. In other words, the record 
lacks sufficiently detailed information to distinguish the proffered position as unique from or more 
complex than posi tions that can be perf ormed by persons without at least a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent. As the petitioner fails to demonstrate how the proffered position 
is so complex or unique relative to other positions within the same occupational category that do not 
require at least a baccalaureate degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent for entry into the 
occupation in the United States, it cannot be concluded that the petitioner has satisfied the second 
alternative prong of 8 C.P.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
We will next address the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3), which may be satisfied if the 
petitioner demonstrates that it normally requires a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent for the proffered position. 3 
3 While a petitioner may believe or otherwise assert that a proffered position requires a degree, that opinion 
alone without corroborating evidence cannot establish the position as a specialty occupation. Were USCIS 
limited solely to reviewing a petitioner's claimed self-imposed requirements, then any individual with a 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 14 
April 15, 2014 letter states; that all of the petitioner's group teachers have bachelor's 
degrees. It provides some examples of those degrees. We observe that the petitioner is a day care 
center with 50 employees, and has been in business since The record does not contain 
sufficient evidence of the number of group teachers the petitioner presently employs or the number it 
has employed in the past and its hiring practices and qualifications of those employees. Without 
such evidence we cannot determine that the petitioner normally requires a bachelor's degree for the 
proffered position. Further, merely demonstrating that it normally requires a bachelor's degree for 
the position would be insufficient. The petitioner is obliged to show that it normally requires a 
minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent for the proffered position. 
In this regard, we observe that although the diploma provided for indicates that she 
has a bachelor's degree in elementary education awarded by a school in the Philippines, no 
evaluation of the equivalency of that foreign degree was submitted. The diplomas of 
and do not indicate the subjects in which they received their degrees. Also, although 
the petitioner stated that has a bachelor's degree, no evidence was provided to 
corroborate that assertion, nor has the subject in which he or she received a degree even been 
alleged. Even further, the record contains insufficient evidence that 
and work for the petitioner, let alone that they work for the petitioner as group 
teachers. 
For all of those reasons, we find that the petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence that it 
normally requires a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent for the 
proffered position, and has not, therefore, satisfied the criterion at 8 C.P. R.§ 21 4.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3). 
Finally, we will address the alternative criterion at 8 C.P. R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4), which is 
satisfied if the petitioner establishes that the nature of the specific duties is so specialized and 
complex that knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with the attainment of a 
baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. 
Again, relative specialization and complexity have not been sufficiently developed by the petitioner 
as an aspect of the proffered position. The duties of the proffered position, such as planning and 
bachelor's degree could be brought to the United States to perform any occupation as long as the employer 
artificially created a token degree requirement, whereby all individuals employed in a particular position 
possessed a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. See Defensor v. Meissner, 
201 F. 3d at 387. In other words, if a petitioner's degree requirement is only symbolic and the proffered 
position does not in fact require such a specialty degree or its equivalent to perform its duties, the occupation 
would not meet the statutory or regulatory definition of a specialty occupation. See § 214(i)(1) of the Act; 
8 C.P.R.§ 214.2(h)(4)(ii) (defining the term "specialty occupation"). 
4 It is not clear whether are the same person, but we observe that 
the record does not contain evidence to support that proposition, nor even an assertion that it is so. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 15 
executing a curriculum; orgamzmg children's activities; developing schedules of various school 
activities; watching for signs of emotional or developmental problems in children and bringing such 
problems to the attention of parents; keeping records of students' progress, routines, and interests; 
and keeping parents informed of children's development contain no indication of a nature so 
specialized and complex they require knowledge usually assoc iated attainment of a minimum of a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. 
In other words, the proposed duties have not been described with sufficient specificity to show that 
they are more specialized and complex than the duties of preschool teacher positions that are not 
usually associated with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. 
Further, as was noted above, the petitioner filed the instant visa petition for a Level I preschool 
teacher position, a position for a beginning-level employee with only a basic understanding of 
teaching preschool. This does not support the proposition that the nature of the specific duties of the 
proffered position is so specialized and complex that their performance is usually associated with 
the attainment of a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent, directly 
related to teaching preschool, especially as the Handbook indicates that some preschool teacher 
positions require no such degree. 
For the reasons discussed above, the evidence of record does not satisfy the criterion at 8 C.P.R . 
§ 21 4.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). 
The petitioner has failed to establish that it has satisfied any of the criteria at 8 C. P.R. 
§ 21 4.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) and, therefore, 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. 
VI. ADDITION AL BASIS 
The record suggests an additional issue that was not addressed in the decision of denial but that, 
nonetheless, also precludes approval of this visa petition. 
The evidence submitted pertinent to the beneficiary's education includes a transcript showing that he 
graduated with a bachelor's degree in child development and education from in the 
Philippines. However, the record contains no evaluation to show the equivalency of the 
beneficiary's foreign education to a U.S. education and degree. As such, the evidence is insufficient, 
pursuant to the salient regulations,5 to show that the beneficiary is qualified to work in any specialty 
occupation position. Therefore, beyond the decision of the director, the visa petition must be denied 
for this additional reason. 6 
5 See 8 C.P.R.§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C). 
6 We conduct appellate review on a de novo basis. See Soltane v. DOJ, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3d Cir. 2004). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 16 
VII. CONCL USION 
An application or petition that fails to comply with the technical requirements of the law may be 
denied by us even if the service center does not identify all of the grounds for denial in the initial 
decision. See Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1025, 10 43 (E.D. Cal. 
2001), affd, 345 F.3d 683 (9th Cir. 2003); see also Soltane v. DOl, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3d Cir. 2004) 
(noting that we conduct appellate review on a de novo basis). 
Moreover, when we deny a petition on multiple alternative grounds, a plaintiff can succeed on a 
challenge only if it shows that we abused our discretion with respect to all of the enumerated 
grounds. See Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d at 1043, affd. 345 F.3d 
683. 
The director's decision will be affirmed and the petition will be denied for the above stated reasons, 
with each considered as an independent and alternative basis for the decision. 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 of Otiende, 26 I&N Dec. 12 7, 128 (BIA 2013 ). 
Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.