dismissed H-1B Case: Engineering

(b)(6)
DATE: MAY 2 8 2015 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION RECEIPT #: 
U.S. Department 11f H!lmeland 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 
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: 
Enclosed is the non-precedent decision of the 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.P.R. § 103.5. 
Motions must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) 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. 
Ron Rosenberg 
hief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.nscis.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 (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 
The petitioner submitted a Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I-129) to the California 
Service Center. In the Form 1 -129 visa petition, the petitioner describes itself as a specialty chassis 
manufacturer that was established in . In order to employ the beneficiary in what it designates 
as a composites engineer 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. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). 
The Director reviewed the record of proceeding and determined that the petitioner did not establish 
eligibility for the benefit sought. Specifically, the Director stated that the petitioner had not 
established that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation in accordance with the 
applicable statutory and regulatory. The Director denied the petition. 
The record of proceeding contains: (1) the petitioner's Form I-129 and supporting documentation; 
(2) the Director's request for evidence (RFE); (3 ) the petitioner's response to the RFE; (4) the 
Director's decision; and (5) the Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) and supporting 
documentation. We reviewed the re�ord in its entirety before issuing our decision. 1 
For the reasons that will be discussed below, we agree with the Director that the petitioner has not 
established eligibility for the benefit sought. Accordingly, the Director's decision will not be 
disturbed. The appeal will be dismissed. 
II. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION 
The primary 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 
For an H-1B petition to be granted, the petitioner must provide sufficient evidence to establish that 
it will employ the beneficiary in a specialty occupation position. To meet its burden of proof in this 
regard, the petitioner must establish that the employment it is offering to the beneficiary meets the 
applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. 
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 
1 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-PRECEDENT DECISION 
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.P.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 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.P.R. § 214.2 (h)(4)(iii)(A) must logically be read together 
with section 214(i)(1) 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 (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 of W-F-, 21 I&N Dec. 50 3 (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 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 4 
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)(l) of the Act and the regulation at 8 C.P. 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 13 9, 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 consid ered. USCIS must examine the 
ultimate employment of the alien, and determine whether the position qualifies as a specialty 
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. 
In ascertaining the intent of a petitioner, USClS looks to the Form I-129 and the documents filed in 
support of the petition. It is only in this manner that the agency can determine the exact position 
offered, the location of employment, the proffered wage, et cetera. Pursuant to 8 C. F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(9)(i), the Director has the responsibility to consider all of the evidence submitted by a 
petitioner and such other evidence that he or she may independently require to assist his or her 
adjudication. Further, the regulation at 8 C. F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iv) provides that "[a]n H-lB 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." 
B. Proffered Position 
With the initial petition, the petitioner provided the following job description for the proffered 
position: 
(b)(6)
Page 5 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Direct Reports 
Composites Technicians 
Tasks 
Coordinate and supervise the daily operations of the Composites production area. 
Apply composites skills to the development of procedures and execution of work 
orders. 
Interact with the Prod uction Management for data collection and work planning. 
Cooperate with Engineering Office and Quality Control for analysis, resolution 
and prevention of technical inconveniences[. ] 
Main Responsibilities 
Supervise Composites Technicians in their day -to-day activities. 
Lead by example and enforce compliance to company policies regarding 
production procedures, quality system, building security, and employee behavior. 
Train new technicians in production procedures. 
Ensure that composites products meet quality requirements at minimal cost. 
Ensure proper documentation and data entry for work orders. 
Apply expertise in Composites engineering to solve problems and provide 
manufacturing input to composite part and procedure design and development. 
Perform Composites Technician tasks - lamination, curing, trimming, bonding, 
etc. on work orders for new products and repair services. 
Maintain inventory of pre-preg and similar raw materials physically stored in the 
Composites areas, and execute inventory transactions to work orders. 
Maintain area equipment and consumables and submit purchase requests. 
Develop time and materials estimates for products and jobs. 
The document also provides the following information regarding the requirements for the position: 
(b)(6)
Page 6 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Educational Requirements 
The requirements listed below are representative of the education, experience, 
knowledge, skills, and/or abilities an individual needs in order to perform this job 
successfully: 
- Bachelor Degree in related field; 
- Equivalent Technical High School Diploma with ten years of matured 
. 3 
expenence; or 
- Two-year Technical/Vocational College plus five year[s] of experience. 
Thereafter, in response to the RFE, the petitioner provided an expanded job description for the 
proffered position. The document includes the following information regarding the requirements 
for the position: 
Educational Requirements 
The requirements listed below are representative of the education, experience, 
knowledge, skills, and/or abilities an individual needs in order to perform this job 
successfully: 
Bachelor Degree in related field(.] 
Equivalent Technical High School Diploma with five years of matured experience. 4 
Two-year Technical/Vocational College plus five year[s] of experience[.] 
Subsequently, with the appeal, the petitioner submitted a job description with the following 
requirements: 
Educational Requirements 
The requirements listed below are representative of the education, experience, 
knowledge, skills, and/or abilities an individual needs in order to perform this job 
successfully: 
- Bachelor Degree in related field, or 
- Two-year Technical/Vocational College plus five year[s] of experience. 
3 Emphasis added. 
4 Emphasis added. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 7 
According to the documentation submitted by the petitioner, it does not require a bachelor's degree 
in a specific specialty (or its equivalent) for the proffered position but, rather, a technical high 
diploma with five (or ten) years of experience, or a two-year degree with five years of experience 
are acceptable.5 
C. Analysis 
To qualify as a specialty occupation, the position must require 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, or its equivalent, as the minimum for entry into the 
occupation. Section 214(i)(1) of the Act; 8 C. F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) and (iii). Thus, the 
documentation submitted by the petitioner indicating that (1) a high school diploma and experience, 
or (2) a two-year degree and experience are acceptable denote that the proffered position is not in 
fact a specialty occupation. 
In promulgating the H-1B regulations, the former INS made clear that the definition of the term 
"specialty occupation" could not be expanded "to include those occupations which did not require a 
bachelor's degree in the specific specialty." 56 Fed. Reg. 61111, 61112 (Dec. 2, 1991). More 
specifically, in responding to comments that "the definition of specialty occupation was too severe 
and would exclude certain occupations from classification as specialty occupations," the former 
INS stated that "[t]he definition of specialty occupation contained in the statute contains this 
requirement [for a bachelor's degree in the specific specialty or its equivalent]" and, therefore, "may 
not be amended in the final rule." !d. 
The petitioner has not demonstrated that it requires at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty, or its equivalent, for the proffered position. Therefore, the Director's decision must be 
affirmed and the appeal dismissed. 
III. BENEFICIARY'S QUALIFICATIONS 
A beneficiary's credentials to perform a particular job are relevant only when the job is found to be 
a s pecialty occupation. As discussed in this decision, the petitioner has not established that the 
proffered position requires a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
Therefore, we need not and will not address the beneficiary's qualifications. 
IV. CONCLUSION AND ORDER 
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. § 13 61; Matter of Otiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 
(BIA 201 3). Here, that burden has not been met. 
5 Moreover, the petitioner had provided inconsistent information regarding the requirements of the proffered 
position. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 8 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 6 
6 As the identified grounds for denial are dispositive of the petitioner's eligibility, we need not address the 
additional issues in the record of proceeding.