dismissed H-1B Case: Healthcare

identiging data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: WAC 04 235 5 1782 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: AUG 2 9 2006 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 1 Ol(a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
WAC 04 235 5 1782 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The director of the California Service Center 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. 
The petitioner states it is a residential healthcare business, with 16 employees. It seeks to employ the 
beneficiary as a management analyst. The director denied the petition because he determined that the 
petitioner had failed to establish that it would employ the beneficiary as a management analyst. 
The record of proceeding before the AAO contains: (1) Form 1-129 and supporting documentation; (2) the 
director's request for evidence; (3) the petitioner's response to the director; and (4) Form I-1290B, with 
counsel's brief and previously submitted documentation. The AAO reviewed the record in its entirety before 
reaching its decision. 
The issue before the AAO is whether the petitioner has established that it has a specialty occupation for which 
it seeks the beneficiary's services. To meet its burden of proof in this regard, a petitioner must establish that 
the job it is offering to the beneficiary meets the following statutory and regulatory requirements. 
Section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1184(i)(l), defines the term "specialty occupation" as an occupation 
that requires: 
(A) theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and 
(B) attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent) 
as a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States. 
The term "specialty occupation" is further defined at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(ii) as: 
An occupation which 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 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.F.R. 9 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty occupation, the position must meet one of 
the following criteria: 
(1) A baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry into the particular position; 
(2) The degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among 
similar organizations or, in the alternative, an employer may show that its particular 
WAC 04 235 5 1782 
Page 3 
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. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) interprets the term "degree" in the above criteria to mean not just 
any baccalaureate or higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proffered 
position. 
The petitioner states that it seeks the beneficiary's services as a management analyst and that the position 
requires the minimum of a baccalaureate degree in business administration, commerce or a related field. 
Evidence of the beneficiary's duties includes: the Form 1-129; the petitioner's letter of support accompanying 
the Form 1-129; and its January 3, 2004 response to the director's request for evidence. At the time of filing, 
the petitioner indicated that it was in the process of acquiring new facilities and expanding its services. It 
stated that "[iln line with expansion plans, and as part of [its] objective to optimize operations," it required the 
services of a management analyst. 
The beneficiary's responsibilities, as described by the petitioner, include: 
Defining and analyzing the company's operations, needs and goals; and its annual revenues, 
employment and expenditures; 
Conducting interviews of staff to determine and assess work flow and productivity; 
Conducting organizational, administrative, fiscal and personnel studies; 
Conducting surveys and collecting information on operational and administrative problems; 
Coordinating and participating in special projects; 
Compiling and preparing reports, memoranda, policies, manuals and newsletters; 
Preparing tables, charts and graphs to illustrate the distribution and trends of statistical and 
financial data; 
Assisting in the preparation of the annual budget by obtaining, compiling and entering data, 
and monitoring expenditures; 
Inspecting policies and procedures to determine compliance with government regulations, 
and explaining government regulations, rules and procedures to managers; 
Tracking legislation affecting business; 
Coordinating all intra-departmental or departmental activities with outside agencies; 
Interviewing with all staff managers to determine departmental needs and areas that can be 
improved; 
Reviewing and developing personnel solutions; 
Preparing projections and recommendations using internal and external factors and 
information; 
WAC 04 235 5 1782 
Page 4 
Preparing proposals for new facility establishment, including budgeting, staffing, scheduling 
and projections; and 
Providing assistance in the implementation of new systems for control over operations, 
including inventories, receivables and labor costs. 
To make its determination whether the employment just described qualifies as a specialty occupation, the 
AAO turns to the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(I) and (2): a baccalaureate or higher degree or its 
equivalent is the normal minimum requirement for entry into the particular position; and a degree requirement 
is common to the industry in parallel 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. Factors considered by the 
AAO when determining these criteria include: whether the Department of Labor's Occupational Outlook 
Handbook (Handbook), on which the AAO routinely relies for the educational requirements of particular 
occupations, reports the industry requires a degree; whether the industry's professional association has made a 
degree a minimum entry requirement; and whether letters or affidavits from firms or individuals in the 
industry attest that such firms "routinely employ and recruit only degreed individuals." See Shanti, Znc. v. 
Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 115 1, 1165 (D. Minn. 1999) (quoting Hird/Blaker Corp. v. Suva, 712 F. Supp. 1095, 
1 102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). 
The director based his denial of the instant petition, in part, on his determination that the petitioner did not 
have the type of business or the scope or organizational complexity to require the services of a full- or part- 
time management analyst. While, as discussed below, the AAO does not find the record to demonstrate that 
the petitioner would employ the beneficiary as a management analyst, it has reached its conclusions on 
grounds other than those relied upon by the director. 
The AAO finds the director to have erred in concluding that the petitioner does not have the organizational 
complexity, nor operate the type of business that would require the services of a management analyst. The 
2006-2007 edition of the Handbook indicates that management analysts work at both large and small 
businesses that need assistance in controlling their operations and expenses, or that need to develop strategies 
to help them remain competitive in a changing marketplace. [Handbook at 921. It reports that management 
analysts are found in a wide range of industries, including management, scientific and technical consulting 
firms, in computer systems design and related services firms, and federal, state and local government. 
Accordingly, the petitioner's intention to employ a management analyst may not be discounted based on its 
type of business. Neither does the fact that the petitioner has a limited number of managers "to observe and to 
implement the recommendations made by the analyst" establish that it would not employ the beneficiary to 
perform the duties of a management analyst. Therefore, the AAO withdraws the director's findings in this 
regard. 
While neither the petitioner's type of business nor its organization preclude it from establishing the proffered 
position as that of a management analyst, it has, nevertheless, failed to provide the evidence necessary to 
demonstrate that the position falls within this occupational title. The petitioner's description of the proffered 
position offers a broad outline of the beneficiary's responsibilities, a number of which are typically performed 
by management or budget analysts in the course of their employment. However, the similarity between the 
petitioner's description of the duties of the proffered position and those performed by management analysts 
WAC 04 235 5 1782 
Page 5 
does not establish the proffered position as a specialty occupation. The duties outlined by the petitioner, with 
one exception, describe the type of work performed by management analysts rather than the specific tasks that 
would be performed by the beneficiary in connection with the petitioner's residential healthcare business. 
The single duty related to the petitioner's operations is that involving the preparation of proposals for the 
establishment of new healthcare facilities. However, although the petitioner at the time of filing claimed to be 
in the process of acquiring new facilities, it has submitted no evidence to support this claim, e.g., business 
plans, loan or mortgage applications, purchase agreements, related correspondence or licensing applications. 
Although the record does contain a copy of a license for one of the petitioner's facilities that has an effective 
date that postdates the filing of the Form 1-129, the AAO does not find it to be sufficient proof of the 
petitioner's expansion plans. The license does not demonstrate that the facility is a newly acquired property. 
As the record does not establish that the petitioner is in the process of acquiring additional facilities, the 
beneficiary's responsibility for preparing proposals to establish these new facilities will not be considered as 
one of the duties of the proffered position. 
The AAO, as previously discussed, requires information regarding the actual responsibilities of a proffered 
position to make its determination regarding the nature of that position and its degree requirements, if any. 
See Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F. 3d 384 (5th Cir. 2000). Without such information, the AAO is unable to 
determine the tasks to be performed by a beneficiary on a day-to-day basis and, therefore, whether a proffered 
position's duties are of sufficient complexity to require the minimum of a baccalaureate degree or its 
equivalent. As the record in the instant case fails to offer a meaningful description of the proffered position's 
responsibilities in relation to its residential health care business, the petitioner is unable to establish that the 
position is that of a management analyst. Accordingly, the petitioner has failed to establish the proffered 
position as a specialty occupation under the first criterion at 8 C.F.R. 9 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(I) - a 
baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the 
particular position. 
Moreover, as the petitioner has submitted no evidence related to its acquisition of new sites, it has failed to 
prove that it is expanding its services or that it would employ a management analyst to support this expansion. 
Therefore, the petitioner has not demonstrated that the beneficiary would be coming to the United States to 
perform the duties of a special occupation pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 3 214.2(h)(l)(B)(l). 
To establish the proffered position as a specialty occupation under the second criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
5 214.2(h)(4)(A), a petitioner must prove that a specific degree requirement is common to its industry in 
parallel positions among similar organizations or, alternately, that a proffered position is so complex or 
unique that it can be performed only by an individual with a degree. In the instant case, the petitioner has 
submitted no evidence that demonstrates that the offered employment qualifies as a specialty occupation 
under either prong of the criterion. Moreover, the petitioner's failure to provide a specific and detailed 
description of the proffered position's duties precludes it from establishing the proffered position as parallel 
to any degreed positions within similar organizations in its industry or distinguishing it from similar but non- 
degreed employment based on its complexity or unique nature. 
WAC 04 235 5 1782 
Page 6 
The AAO next considers the criteria at 8 C.F.R. $5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3) and (4): the employer normally 
requires a degree or its equivalent for the position; and the nature of the specific duties is so specialized and 
complex that the knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with the attainment of a 
baccalaureate or higher degree. 
To determine whether a proffered position may be established as a specialty occupation under the third 
criterion - the employer normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the position - the AAO usually 
reviews the petitioner's past employment practices, as well as the histories, including the names and dates of 
employment, of those employees with degrees who previously held the position, and copies of those 
employees' diplomas. In the instant case, the petitioner does not contend that the position may be established 
as a specialty occupation on the basis of its normal hiring practices. Further, the record indicates that the 
proffered position is newly created in response to the petitioner's expansion plans and that the petitioner has 
no hiring history regarding it. Thus, the petitioner has not established eligibility under this criterion. 
The fourth criterion requires a petitioner to establish that the nature of the specific duties of the proffered 
position is so specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with 
the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree. However, without a meaningful description of the 
proffered position's duties, the petitioner cannot establish them as either specialized or complex. 
Accordingly, the record also fails to prove that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation under 
the criterion at 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). 
Beyond the decision of the director, the AAO does not find the record to establish that the beneficiary is 
qualified to perform the duties of a specialty occupation. 
To establish the beneficiary's qualifications as a management analyst, the petitioner has submitted copies of 
the beneficiary's degree in office administration from the Eulogio "Amang" Rodriguez Institute of Science 
and Technology in The Philippines, her academic transcripts from that institution and an evaluation of her 
academic credentials prepared by the Global Education Group, Inc. in Miami, Florida. The evaluation finds 
the beneficiary to have the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree awarded by a regionally accredited college 
in the United States. 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C)(2), a beneficiary may be found qualified to perform the duties of a 
specialty occupation if he or she holds a foreign degree determined to be equivalent to a U.S. baccalaureate or 
higher degree required by the specialty. While the credentials evaluation submitted by the petitioner finds the 
beneficiary to hold a foreign degree that is the equivalent of a U.S. baccalaureate degree, it does not indicate 
the academic field of that degree equivalency. Therefore, the record does not demonstrate that the 
beneficiary's U.S. degree equivalency is in a field required by the specialty, as required to satisfy the 
referenced criterion. For this reason as well, the petition will be denied. 
The AAO notes that the basis for its decision differs from that relied upon by the director. An application or 
petition that fails to comply with the technical requirements of the law may be denied by the AAO 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, 1043 (E.D. Cal. 2001), aff'd 345 F.3d 683 (9th Cir. 2003); see 
WAC 04 235 51782 
Page 7 
also Dor v. INS, 891 F.2d 997, 1002 n. 9 (2d Cir. 1989)(noting that the AAO reviews appeals on a de novo 
basis). 
For reasons related in the preceding discussion, the petitioner has failed to establish that the proffered position 
is a specialty occupation or that the beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of a specialty occupation. 
Accordingly, the AAO shall not disturb the director's denial of the petition. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
5 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
0RDER:The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.