dismissed H-1B Case: Financial Services

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 11259081 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (H-1B) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : FEB. 4, 2021 
The Petitioner, a global financial services company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as an 
"analyst" under the H-1 B nonirnmigrant classification for specialty occupations . 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-1B 
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 of the Vermont Service Center initially denied the petition in August 2019, concluding 
that the record did not establish that proffered position qualified as a specialty occupation. The 
Petitioner filed a motion to reopen and reconsider the petition in September 2019. The motion was 
granted , but the grounds of denial were not overcome, and the petition's denial was affirmed . Now, 
the matter is now before us on appeal. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence .1 
We review the questions in this matter de novo. 2 Upon de novo review , we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
Section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Act defines an H-1B nonimmigrant as a foreign national "who is 
coming temporarily to the United States to perform services .. . in a specialty occupation described in 
section 214(i)(l) ... "(emphasis added). Section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1184(i)(l), defines the 
term "specialty occupation" as an occupation that requires "theoretical and practical application of a 
body of highly specialized knowledge, and 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 section 214(i)(l) of the Act but adds a 
non-exhaustive list of fields of endeavor. In addition, 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) provides that the 
1 Section 291 of the Act; Matter ofCha wathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). 
2 See Matter of Christo 's Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015) . 
proffered position must meet one of four criteria to qualify as a specialty occupation position. 3 Lastly, 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(i)(A)(]) states that an H-lB classification may be granted to a foreign national 
who "will perform services in a specialty occupation ... " ( emphasis added). 
Accordingly, to determine whether the Beneficiary will be employed in a specialty occupation, we 
look to the record to ascertain the services the Beneficiary will perform and whether such services 
require the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge attained 
through at least a bachelor's degree or higher in a specific specialty or its equivalent. Without 
sufficient evidence regarding the duties the Beneficiary will perform, we are unable to determine whether 
the Beneficiary will be employed in an occupation that meets the statutory and regulatory definitions of 
a specialty occupation and a position that also satisfies at least one of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 2 l 4.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A). The services the Beneficiary will perform in the position determine: (1) the normal 
minimum educational requirement for entry into 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. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
By regulation, the Director is charged with determining whether the petition involves a specialty 
occupation as defined in section 214(i)(l) of the Act. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(i)(B)(2). The Director 
may request additional evidence in the course of making this determination. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(8). 
In addition, a petitioner must establish eligibility at the time of filing the petition and must continue to 
be eligible through adjudication. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l). 
II. PROFFERED POSITION 
The Petitioner seeks to employ the Beneficiary as an "analyst." In response to the Director's request 
for evidence (RFE), 4 the Petitioner provided the job duties of the proffered position with additional 
details as follows: 
• [30% of the Time]: Engage with the Firm's business units to analyze, capture, and 
validate requirements with technology teams in order to solve business challenges 
in an agile fashion. 
o Works with business stakeholders and subject matter experts to identify 
opportunities for improvement in wealth management platforms and 
operations processes. 
3 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) must be read with the statutory and regulatory definitions ofa specialty occupation under 
section 214(i)(l) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). We construe the term "degree" 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. 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 pmiicular position"). 
4 In response to the Director's request for evidence, the Petitioner provided additional details to the initially described 
duties. 
2 
o Works with scrum masters, product owners, project managers, and 
business/data analysts in the team and other platform teams, driving 
issue analysis & resolution, educating peers, and drive the project 
throughout the SDLC [Software Development Life Cycle] process until 
execution. 
o Gathers, analyzes, and documents business needs into technical designs 
and system requirements specifications. 
o Walkthroughs requirements to tech partners during grooming sessions 
to review the business asks and evaluate technical feasibility. 
• [30% of the Time]: Provide technical, data, analytical, data science, and process 
support for up-front product and data analysis. 
o Leverages technical knowledge to understand system behavior, 
interactions and dependencies of systems to convert high-level business 
needs into detailed requirements. 
o Applies knowledge of data analytics and relational database to facilitate 
pulling and querying of data from multiple sources, in order to create 
reports for financial advisors. 
o Interacts with system architects and developers to ensure proper 
implementation as required by product owners from business. 
• [15% of the Time]: Perform end-to-end solution development in support of the 
Firm's information needs. 
o Maintains standards of financial advisor platforms to preserve 
consistent user experience. 
o For defects found in production, she investigates and performs data 
analysis to identify root causes and facilitate defect resolution. 
o Works closely with project managers to ensure smooth delivery across 
multiple projects to meet established performance, schedule, and budget 
goals. 
o Involved in the design or modification of financial advisor platforms 
and tools to ensure human-centered and intuitive user experience. 
• [25% of the Time]: Leverage her quantitative skills to document IT solution 
requirements, including business, functional and technical specifications. 
o Writes requirements from front end, middle tier, to back end 
components of applications. 
o Illustrates functional requirement documents with design mockups, 
process flows, and data mapping. 
o Articulates use cases to ensure completeness of requirements and close 
the gaps between design and technical functionalities. 
o Reviews technical design documents with software engineering team 
and provides feedback to ensure adherence to the functional 
requirements. 
The Petitioner's March 2019 support letter states that the position's minimum required education is a 
bachelor's degree in operations research or a related field of study. 
3 
III. ANALYSIS 
Upon review of the record in its totality and for the reasons set out below, we conclude that the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
Specifically, we conclude that the record (1) does not describe the position's duties with sufficient 
detail; and (2) does not establish that the job duties require an educational background, or its 
equivalent, commensurate with a specialty occupation. 5 In particular, we find that the Petitioner has 
not established the substantive nature of the position, which precludes a determination that the 
proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation under at least one of the four regulatory 
specialty-occupation criteria enumerated at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l)-(4). 
A. Nature of the Position 
A crucial aspect of this matter is whether the Petitioner has sufficiently described the duties of the 
proffered position such that we may discern the nature of the position and whether the position actually 
requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge attained 
through at least a baccalaureate degree in a specific discipline. When determining whether a position 
is a specialty occupation, we look at the nature of the business offering the employment and the 
description of the specific duties of the position as it relates to the performance of those duties within 
the context of that particular employer's business operations. 
On the labor condition application (LCA) 6 submitted in support of the H-1B petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the occupational category "Operations Research Analysts" 
(ORA) corresponding to the standard occupational classification code (SOC) 15-2031 from the 
Occupational Information Network (O*NET), at a wage level II rate. According to O*NET's 
description, positions located within the ORA occupation "[ f]ormulate[ s] and appl[ies] mathematical 
modeling and other optimizing methods to develop and interpret information that assists management 
with decision making, policy formulation, or other managerial fonctions." 7 Several other components 
of O*NET' s description continue to focus on mathematical modeling. 8 
The Petitioner's description of the proffered position lacks the detail necessary to determine whether 
the proffered position falls within the occupational category designated on the LCA. As mentioned, 
O*NET indicates that the ORA occupation will formulate and apply mathematical modeling to 
interpret information. Upon review, the Petitioner's job duties do not state the position engages in any 
mathematical modeling. Rather, the job duties appear to be proving technical and data support, and 
to developing application software solutions. For example, the Petitioner's job duties and supporting 
details which appear to relate to developing software include "[e]ngag[ing] with the Firm's business 
units to analyze, capture, and validate requirements with technology teams in order to solve business 
5 The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H-1 B petition, including evidence regarding the proffered 
position. While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
6 A petitioner submits the LCA to DOL 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 duties, experience, and qualifications. Section 212(n)(l) of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 655.73l(a). 
7 O*NET Summary Report for "Operations Research Analysts," https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/15-203 l.OO 
(last visited Feb. 3, 2021). 
8 Id. 
4 
challenges in an agile fashion"; "[d]riving project throughout the SDLC [Software Development Life 
Cycle] process until execution"; "[p ]erform[ing] end-to-end solution development in support of the 
Firm's information needs"; "[i]nvolved in the design or modification of financial advisor platforms 
and tools to ensure human-centered and intuitive user experience"; "[l]everag[ing] [Beneficiary's] 
quantitative skills to document IT solution requirements, including business, functional and technical 
specifications"; and "[ w ]rit[ing] requirements from front end, middle tier, to back end components of 
applications." Although some of these tasks may include some overlap with the ORA occupation, 9 
these duties are not described with sufficient context to conclude they are consistent with SOC code 
15-2031. Rather it appears they more likely fall within the Software Developer, Applications 
occupation description of"[ d]evelop, create, and modify general computer applications software or 
specialized utility programs" and "[a]nalyze user needs and develop software solutions." 10 
As further evidence, the Petitioner provided three work samples reviewed by the Beneficiary to 
demonstrate the "specialized and complex" and "complex or unique" duties performed by the position. 
However, all three samples are "software requirements specification" documents and seem to 
demonstrate that this proffered position will be involved in software development. In particular, the 
"My Analytics Hub Module" and "[PPM Name]" documents appear to be software specifications to 
update one of the Petitioner's modules in an application software product and the Petitioner's internal 
messaging software. Because these documents appear to be software development-related, the 
samples cast more doubt on the actual nature of the proffered position. 
In general, if the duties of a proffered position involve more than one occupational category (i.e., 
"ORA" and "Software Developer, Applications"), the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL's) 
"Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance" states that the employer "should default directly 
to the relevant O*NET-SOC occupational code for the highest paying occupation." 11 A Level II 
position located within the "Software Developer, Applications" (SOC code 15-1132) occupational 
category would necessitate a higher wage of $96,367 rather than the offered wage of $83,866 per 
year. 12 Notably such a wage disparity highlights the difference between the "ORA" and the "Software 
Developers, Applications" occupational categories generally, and more specific to this case, the 
significance of the Petitioner's choice of the lower paying occupational category. 
9 The O*NET description for SOC 15-2031, ORA description states"[ m ]ay collect and analyze data and develop decision 
support software, service, or products." The description's use of "may" suggests that the ORA's software development 
duties are (a) limited to decision support and (b) not a main duty for this occupation. In addition, a review of the O*NET 
summary tasks for ORA does not include that software development is a core task for this occupation. Id. 
10 On November 17, 2020, O*NET Online updated the occupation SOC 15-1132, Software Developers, Applications, to 
SOC 15-1252, Software Developers. For the purposes of this decision, we will refer to the occupation to the code and 
name at the time of the Director's decision, SOC 15-1132, Software Developers Applications. See 
https://www.onetonline.org/ Archive_ ONET-SOC _ 201 O _Taxonomy_ 09 _ 2020/link/summary/15-1132.00 (last visited on 
Feb. 3, 2021). 
11 U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. 
Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdt!NPWHC Guidance_ Revised_ 11 _ 2009 .pdf. 
12 The Petitioner provided an LCA f011 !in New York that was certified by the Department of Labor on 
March 19, 2019. The wages for SOC 15-1132, Software Developers, Applications, at the time of the LCA's certification 
can be found on the Foreign Labor Certification Data Center Online Wage Library: 
https://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?code= l 5-l l 32&area=C::J&year= l 9&source= 1 (last visited Feb. 
3, 2021) 
5 
Additionally, upon review of the proposed duties and details, we conclude that they do not provide 
sufficient and consistent detail to ascertain whether those duties require at least a baccalaureate degree 
in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, as required for classification as a specialty occupation. For 
example, the detailed job duties include "[ w ]orks with business stakeholders and subject matter 
experts to identify opportunities for improvement in wealth management platforms and operations 
processes"; "[ w ]alkthroughs requirements to tech partners during grooming sessions to review the 
business asks and evaluate technical feasibility"; and "[l]everage her quantitative skills to document 
IT solution requirements, including business, functional and technical specifications." However, the 
duty descriptions are so broad and provide so little context that they do not illuminate the substantive 
application of knowledge involved or any particular educational requirement associated with such 
duties. It is not possible to ascertain the nature and level ofresponsibility of the proposed position as 
generally described. 
In addition, the Petitioner provided a letter fro~ l the Beneficiary's supervisor.c=J 
~-~I states that a bachelor's degree in operations research is necessary to perform the position. She 
then cites a few courses as essential to the performance of the duties of the proffered position. 
However, while a few such related courses may be beneficial in performing certain duties of the 
position, the Petitioner has not demonstrated 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 proffered position. Further, although the work product submitted show some skill is 
involved in the proffered position, these examples do not provide probative evidence that the position 
requires a bachelor's or higher in specific specialty. Upon review, we conclude that the record lacks 
sufficiently detailed information to distinguish the proffered position as more "specialized and 
complex" or "complex or unique" from other positions that can be performed by persons without at 
least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
Without more specific and persuasive evidence regarding the nature of the proffered position's duties, 
and in the absence of a sufficiently reliable job description, the Petitioner has not demonstrated the 
substantive nature of the work to be performed by the Beneficiary. This, therefore, precludes analysis 
of whether the proffered position satisfies any criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). The record 
also does not demonstrate that performing the general duties described would require the theoretical 
and practical application of highly specialized knowledge and attainment of at least a bachelor's degree 
in a specific specialty or its equivalent. 13 
B. Petitioner's Assertions on Appeal 
To address the Petitioner's assertions on appeal, we observe that even if the proffered position included 
some duties of positions located within the "Operations Research Analysts" occupation, such an 
occupation is not categorically a specialty occupation. To inform this inquiry, we consider the 
information contained in the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook 
(Handbook) regarding the duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations it 
13 See section 214(i)(l) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) (defining the term "specialty occupation). 
6 
addresses. 14 The subchapter of the Handbook titled "How to Become an Operations Research 
Analyst" states, in relevant part, that while "some schools offer bachelor's and advanced degree 
programs in operations research, some analysts have degrees in other technical or quantitative fields, 
such as engineering, computer science, analytics, or mathematics." 15 The Handbook indicates farther 
that courses in various fields such as engineering, mathematics, computer science, economics, and 
political science are useful because "operations research is a multidisciplinary field with a wide variety 
of applications." 16 Because the Handbook recognizes this occupation as multidisciplinary, and does 
not identify a specific discipline to perform the duties of the occupation, the Handbook does not 
support a conclusion that these positions comprise an occupational group for which normally the 
minimum requirement for entry is at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
The Petitioner, who has the burden of proof in these matters must show that the particular position 
offered to the Beneficiary is among the positions for which a bachelor's degree in a specific discipline, 
or its equivalent, is required. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts this position qualifies as a specialty occupation because a degree 
requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions as evidenced by job postings. To be relevant 
for consideration under this criterion, however, the job vacancy announcements must advertise "parallel 
positions," and the announcements must have been placed by organizations that (1) conduct business in 
the Petitioner's industry and (2) are also "similar" to the Petitioner. Absent such evidence, job postings 
submitted by a Petitioner are generally outside the scope of consideration for this criterion. None of 
these job vacancy announcements meet this threshold. 
From the initial petition to their appeal brief: the Petitioner provided several job postings to demonstrate 
that positions comparable to the Petitioner's position require at least a minimum of a bachelor's degree 
in a specialty field for the position. The Petitioner is a financial services company; but we note some 
of the job postings include organizations not in the same industry. For example, one of the companies 
is an airline company, another companies is an aerospace company, and another is a technology firm. 
Another company focuses on automotive diagnostic and vehicle electronic services, and the Petitioner 
included postings from the federal government. 
Even considering the job postings from companies in the financial industry, the Petitioner does not 
discuss in detail how the advertised job positions are parallel to the proffered position. Our review of 
the job postings confirms that the advertised job opportunities are not for "parallel positions." The 
Petitioner does not require any work experience to enter the proffered position. However, most of the 
advertised positions require experience, some substantial. For example, two of the positions require 
at least one year of experience, three of the other positions require at least two years of work 
experience, two require "2+" years of experience, another requires two to three years of work 
14 We do not maintain that the Handbook is the exclusive source ofrelevant infonnation. 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 we regularly review the Handbook on the duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of 
occupations that it addresses. Nevertheless, the burden ofproofremains on the Petitioner to submit sufficient evidence to 
support a finding that its particular position would nonnally have a minimum, specialty degree requirement, or its 
equivalent, for entry. 
15 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Operations Research Analysts, 
https://www.bls.gov/ooh/math/operations-research-analysts.htm (last visited Feb. 3, 2021 ). 
16 Id. 
7 
experience, two require three years of experience, one position requires "3+" years, three require three 
to five years of experience, one requires five to eight years of experience, and another requires six or 
more years of experience. Also, most of the postings show different educational requirements than 
the petition's bachelor's degree requirements. At least twelve of the job postings require at least 
"advanced degree", master's degree, or a Ph.D. Two other job postings require no degree for entry 
into the opportunity. 17 Considered collectively, these factors indicate that the advertised positions are 
not "parallel" to the proposed position. 
For all of these reasons, the Petitioner has not established that any of these job vacancy announcements 
are relevant. Even if they were, we would still conclude that they did not satisfy this criterion, as they 
do not indicate that a bachelor's degree in a spec[fic specialty, or the equivalent, is common to the 
industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. The job postings' acceptable fields of study 
are not limited to only operation research, but include a large range of fields, such as qualitative 
marketing, economics, mathematics, physics, financial engineering, finance, computer science, 
statistics, and actuarial science. In addition, the Petitioner did not provide any independent evidence 
as to how representative these particular job advertisements are of the particular advertising 
employers' recruiting history for the types of job advertised. 18 As the advertisements are only 
solicitations for hire, they are not evidence of the employers' actual hiring practices. 
On appeal, the Petitioner also asserts they have met their evidentiary burden to show that they normally 
require a degree or its equivalent for the proffered position. Specifically, the appeal arguesD 
I Is letter attested the Petitioner "consistently" requires a bachelor's degree for the position 19, 
and this should be considered probative evidence. 
While a petitioner may believe or otherwise assert that a proffered position requires a degree in a 
specific specialty, that statement alone without corroborating evidence cannot establish the position 
17 Even if the job postings advertised positions that are parallel to the proffered position, and are from similar companies 
within the same industry, which they are not, they would still not be relevant for our consideration under this criterion 
because they do not confirm that the job postings mandate at least a bachelor's in a specialty degree. The Petitioner 
indicated that a bachelor's degree, or its equivalent, in operations research or related is required. If the Petitioner contends 
that these job postings that require no degrees are evidence of degree requirements that are similar to its degree 
requirements and are nonnally required in its industry, the Petitioner confirms that the proffered position is not a specialty 
occupation. 
18 In addition, the Petitioner does not demonstrate what statistically valid inferences, if any, could be drawn from the job 
postings with regard to the common educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations. See 
generally Earl Babbie, The Practice of Social Research 186-228 (7th ed. 1995). Moreover, given that there is no indication 
that the advertisements were randomly selected, the validity of any such inferences could not be accurately determined 
even if the sampling unit were sufficiently large. See id at 195-96 ( explaining that ·'[r]andom selection is the key to [the] 
process [ of probability sampling]" and that "random selection offers access to the body of probability theory, which 
provides the basis for estimates of population parameters and estimates of error"). 
As such, even if the job vacancy announcements supported the finding that the position requires a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, it could not be found that such a limited number of postings that appear to 
have been consciously selected could credibly refute the findings of the Handbook published by the Bureau of Labor 
Statistics that such a position does not normally require at least a baccalaureate degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent, for entry into the occupation in the United States. 
19 On appeal, the Petitioner appears to misstate the position's title as an "Associate." This appears to be a typographical 
error. 
8 
as a specialty occupation. 20 Were we 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 employer artificially created a token degree requirement, 
whereby all individuals employed in a particular position possessed a baccalaureate or higher degree 
in the specific specialty, or its equivalent. 21 
We also note that the Petitioner misunderstands the Director's analysis regarding the Petitioner's 
normal hiring requirements. If the Petitioner always requires a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty 
to perform the duties of the proffered position, which it has not corroborated in this record, this could 
possibly satisfy the regulatory requirement at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3). However, the 
Petitioner must still satisfy the statutory requirement that the position itself requires the theoretical and 
practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge and the attainment of a baccalaureate 
or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, as the minimum for entry into the 
occupation. 22 As discussed, the Petitioner has not provided probative evidence that the proffered 
position qualifies as a specialty occupation under the statutory requirements. 
As discussed above, the record does not include specific and persuasive evidence regarding the nature 
of the proffered position's duties, thus, the Petitioner has not demonstrated the substantive nature of 
the work to be performed by the Beneficiary. Upon review of the totality of the record, including the 
Petitioner's assertions on appeal, the Petitioner has not submitted probative evidence that the proffered 
position satisfies any criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). The record also does not demonstrate 
that performing the general duties described would require the theoretical and practical application of 
highly specialized knowledge and attainment of at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or 
its equivalent. 23 
III. CONCLUSION 
The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons. 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. The Petitioner has not met that burden .. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
20 On their appeal, the Petitioner states that the Handbook and O*NET Online c01Toborate the occupation requires a 
bachelor's degree. However, as discussed, the bachelor's degree must be in a specific specialty (emphasis added). Neither 
the Handbook, as previously discussed, nor O*NET Online indicate the degree must be in a specific specialty. O*NET 
shows that a majority of individuals in the ORA occupation have a bachelor's degree, but O*NET does not specify the 
course of study that resulted in the bachelor's degree for the respondents. As such, the Petitioner did not provide probative 
evidence for their assertion. 
21 See Defensor, 201 F. 3d at 387. 
22 See section 214(i)(l) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) (defining the term "specialty occupation"). 
23 Id 
9