dismissed H-1B Case: Healthcare Administration

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MA 1TER OF B-P-P- PC 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JAN. 12,2017 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a medical clinic, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a "management 
analyst" under the H-1 B nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See 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-IB 
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, Vermont Service Center, initially approved the petition. Subsequently, the Director 
revoked the approval of the petition finding that the Petitioner had violated the terms and conditions 
of the approved petition. The Petitioner subsequently submitted a motion to reopen and reconsider. 
·The Director granted the motion, but concluded that the Petitioner did not establish that the 
Beneficiary is performing duties established by the terms and conditions of the approved petition and 
affirmed its decision to revoke. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and 
asserts that the petition's approval should be reinstated. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
A. Revocation 
USCIS may revoke the approval of an H-1B petition pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(ll)(iii), which 
states the following: 
(A) Grounds for revocation. The Director shall send to the 
petitioner a notice of intent to revoke the petition in relevant part if he or she 
finds that: · 
Matter of B-P-P- PC 
(1) The beneficiary is no longer employed by the petitioner in the capacity 
specified in the petition .... ; or 
(2) The statement of facts contained in the petition ... was not true and 
correct, inaccurate, fraudulent, or misrepresented a material fact; or 
(3) The petitioner violated terms and conditions of the approved petition; 
or 
( 4) The petitioner violated requirements of section 101 (a)(15)(H) of the 
Act or paragraph (h) of this section; or 
(5) The approval of the petition violated [paragraph] (h) of this section or 
involved gross error. 
B. Specialty Occupation 
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 
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) largely restates this statutory definition, but adds a non­
exhaustive list of fields of endeavor. In addition, the regulations provide that the proffered position 
must meet one of the following criteria to qualify as a specialty occupation: 
(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. 
2 
Matter of B-P-P- PC 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A). USCIS has consistently interpreted 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 proposed position. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Cherto.ff; 
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"); Defensor v. Meissner, 
201 F.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). 
II. PROFFERED POSITION 
The Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary will serve as a management analyst and provided the 
following job duties for the position: 
• Analyze business procedures of the organization to devise efficient methods for 
accomplishing work (15%); 
• Study work problems and procedures for communications, information flow, 
inventory control and work analysis (15% ); 
• Gather information on work problems regarding the operational and 
communication procedures and analyze the information gathered to consider 
solutions and alternate methods of problem solving and proceeding (20% ); 
• Confer with staff & management to discuss the business plans and identify 
problems (15%); 
• Suggest ways to improve efficiency of patient treatment through Electronic 
medical records like giving preventive measures care for the patient with Obesity, 
Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension etc., maintaining the system to make it easy for 
the doctor and other employee to operate, inventory organization, billing 
management and effectively resolve their complaints and concerns (20%); 
• Prepare business reports, memoranda and instructional manuals as documentation 
of organization development and prepare work flowcharts and diagrams to specify 
detail operations to be performed by personnel (15%). 
III. ANALYSIS 
A. Revocation 
I 
Upon review of the record, we find that the Petitioner had violated the terms and conditions of the 
approved petition, and the approval of this H-1 B petition was properly revoked pursuant to 8 C.F .R. 
§ 214.2(h)(ll )(iii)(A)(3). 1 Specifically, the evidence in the record is insufficient to establish that the 
Beneficiary is employed in a specialty occupation. 
1 Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap, we will address each of the criteria individually. 
3 
Matter of B-P-P- PC 
The notice of intent to revoke (NOIR) informed the Petitioner that during an administrative site visit, 
the signatory for the Petitioner indicated that the Beneficiary was in the position of "office 
manager/computer support/business management." The NOIR further noted that the Beneficiary 
described her job duties as "billing; checking insurance; helping to improve core reports; helping 
with home help application programs; and Obamacare." The Director specifically requested 
evidence to document that the Beneficiary is employed in a specialty occupation. 
In response to the NOIR, the Petitioner provided an expanded description of the Beneficiary's duties 
as follows: 
Study work problems and procedures for communications, information flow, 
inventory control and work analysis (15% ); 
• Information retrieval, gathering, compiling, modeling, validating, and analyzing 
medical data. The data is then used to understand the current trends in the health 
care system and to make well-informed decisions[.] 
• [Q]uality care documentation: Related to both deliveries of more effective, quality 
care and capture of charges 
• Communications: Communication refers to messaging between physician and 
patients, physician and staff, and physician and colleagues (Refers to labs, 
immunizations, prescriptions, care costs)[.] 
• Inventory control: Conduct research on inventory used, call vendors to negotiate 
costs on bulk purchases and seek decrease supply cost[.] 
Gather information on work problems regarding the operational and 
communication procedures and analyze information gathered to consider 
solutions and alternate methods of problems solving and proceeding (20% ); ' 
• Defining a problem or highlighting an area for improvement, such as operating 
costs. Operating costs that includes [sic] variable costs (computer supplies, 
software upload, utilities, waste disposal) and equipment operating costs 
(maintenance of equipment's) 
• [S]tudy on costs, collect data on maintenance and find out best cost solutions[.] 
• Prepare monthly status report, compare medical budgeting to their prior analysis, 
and assist in customer (patients) issues[.] 
Analyze business procedures of the organization to devise efficient methods for 
accomplishing work (15% ); 
• Perform custom build work for enhancements, templates and smarty forms as 
specified by users and prioritized by HER committee. 
• Developing and implementing improving plans 
4 
(b)(6)
Matter of B-P-P- PC 
Suggest ways to improve efficiency of patient treatment (20% ); 
• Usage of Electronic medical records like giving preventive measures care for the 
patient with Obesity, Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension etc. Maintaining the 
system to make it easy for the doctor or other employees to operate, inventory 
organization, billing management and effectively resolve their complaints and 
concerns 
QARR: QARR stands for Quality Assurance Reporting Requirements (20%); 
• This is the New York State Department of Health's version of the national Health 
Plan Employer DatFt and Information Set {HEDIS) developed and overseen by the 
national Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA). QARR is a set of 
performance measures that health plans must report, on an annual basis, to 
NYSDOH under Medicaid, Medicare and child health plus plans. QARR data 
includes performance measures related to many preventive health conditions and 
services such as cancer, heart disease, depression, hypertension, asthma, diabetes , 
well care visits and age appropriate immunizations, etc. All Primary care 
providers who're actively participating with Medicaid and Medicare HMO's have 
to submit all QARR measures every month. All HMOs (Health 
Maintenance 
organizations) provides Primary Care provider percentile reports of QARR 
measures. Facility has to convert that percentile data in to excel sheet that 
includes patient's required care or due care. Currently practice has approximate 
eleven hundred Medicaid and Medicare patients[.] 
NCQA-PCMH certification: (5%)[;] 
• Practice is currently certified NCQA-PCMH (Patient centered Medical Home) for 
level 2 and aspire to achieve level 3. To achieve the goals of level 3 practice 
needs part time employee with management and analytical skill who can guide the 
staff to implement changes required to g'ain points. Approximate project time 
frame will be 16 to 18 months. Medical practice is part of and it 
is one of the requirement for all 
end of the year 20 17[.] 
Medicaid EHR incentive Program (5%)[;] 
to get level 3 before 
• Practice is eligible and actively participating in EHR incentives and certification 
program. New York state department of health introduced incentive program 
available in year of 2012. Practice also started Program participation started [sic] 
in year 2012. According to requirements of the application of incentive program 
practice has to submit application every year in beginning of the year until year 
2017 which requires analytical study of the Medicaid patients seen in practice 
during previous year. Application composed of different sections including total 
5 
Matter of B-P-P- PC 
patients seen through CPOE (Computerized Patient order entry), Medication 
reconciliation, patient distribution in age, percentile study distribution of 
diagnosis and treatment and care given and all preventive criteria. Period of 
submission of application to approval of it is vary from six weeks to 12 weeks. 
Beneficiary's skill and knowledge is required in preparing the application, 
submission of it, dealing queries and changes in application. 
The expanded job description includes duties not mentioned in the initial petition. For example, the 
Beneficiary's duties now include preparing documentation for QARR, NCQA-PCMH certification 
and the Medicaid EHR Inventive Program. However, when responding to the NOIR, the Petitioner 
cannot offer a new position to the Beneficiary, or materially change a position's title, its level of 
authority within the organizational hierarchy, its associated job responsibilities, or the requirements 
of the position. See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(2)(i)(E). In the event of a material change to the terms and 
conditions of employment specified in__the original petition, a petitioner must file an amended or new 
petition with USCIS with a new corresponding LCA. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(2)(i)(E). Furthermore, 
petitioners must "immediately notify the Service of any changes in the terms and conditions of 
employment of a beneficiary which may affect eligibility" for H-1 B status and, if they will continue 
to employ the beneficiary, file an amended petition. 8 C.F.R, § 214.2(h)(ll)(i)(A). See generally 
Matter of Simeio Solutions, LLC, 26 l&N Dec. 542 (AAO 2015) (describing a petitioner's 
obligations to file an amended or new petition with a new corresponding LCA). 
Further, the Petitioner also submitted a project report describing NCQA-PCMH certification process. 
Notably, the report describes the Beneficiary as a "Medical Manager~Leader" and ''training 
specialist," but not a management analyst. The Petitioner also submitted performance review reports 
which state the Beneficiary's job title as a management analyst, but they do not provide sufficient 
information regarding the Beneficiary's duties. The reports contain vague comments such as 
"employee has improved in most of the skills and office is getting excellent rewards/incentives as 
well" and "marked improvement from last review, more scope of improvement in communication 
skill." Therefore, the documents do not sufficiently substantiate that the Beneficiary is employed in 
a position consistent with the terms and conditions of the approved petition. 
The Petitioner was notified in the NOIR that it does not appear that the Beneficiary is employed in a 
specialty occupation but did not provide sufficient evidence to substantiate that the Beneficiary is 
employed according to the terms and conditions of the approved petition. Therefore, the Director 
properly revoked the approval of the petition pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(l1 )(iii)(A)(3). 
B. Specialty Occupation 
Even if the Petitioner had established that the Beneficiary is employed as a management analyst, 
which it has not, the record does not demonstrate that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty 
occupation. Specifically, the record (1) does not describe the position's duties with sufficient detail; 
Matter of B-P-P- PC 
and (2) does not establish that the job dut1es require an educational background, or its equivalent, 
commensurate with a specialty occupation. 2 
1. First Criterion 
We tum to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(l ), which requires that a baccalaureate or 
higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for 
entry into the particular position. To inform this inquiry, we recognize the U.S. Department of Labor's 
(DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) as an authoritative source on the duties and 
educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses.3 
On the labor condition application (LCA) submitted in support of the H-lB petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the occupational category "Management Analysts" 
corresponding to the Standard Occupational Classification code 13-1111.4 
We reviewed the information in the Handbook regarding the occupational category "Management 
Analysts," including the sections regarding the typical educational requirements for this occupational 
category. 
The subchapter of the Handbook entitled "How to Become a Management Analyst" states the 
following about this occupational category: 
2 The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the. H-I B petition, including evidence regarding the proffered 
position and its business operations. While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and 
considered each one. 
3 All of our references are to the 20 I 6-20 I 7 edition of the Handbook, which may be accessed at the .Internet site 
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/. We do not, however, maintain that the Handbook is the exclusive source of relevant 
information. 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 USC IS regularly reviews the Handbook on the duties and 
educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses. To satisfy the first criterion, however, the 
burden of proof remains on the Petitioner to submit sufficient evidence to support a finding that its particular position 
would normally have a minimum, specialty degree requirement, or its equivalent, for entry. 
4 The Petitioner classified the proffered position at a Level I wage (the lowest of four assignable wage levels). We will 
consider this selection in our analysis of the position. The "Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance" issued by 
the DOL provides a description of the wage levels. A Level I wage rate is generally appropriate for positions for which 
the Petitioner expects the Beneficiary to have a basic understanding of the occupation. This wage rate indicates: (I) that 
the Beneficiary will be expected to perform routine tasks that require limited, if any, exercise of judgment; (2) that he 
will be closely supervised and his work closely monitored and reviewed for accuracy; and (3) that he will receive 
specific instructions on required tasks and expected results. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing 
Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http://flcdatacenter.com/download/NPWHC _Guidance_ Revised _11_ 2009.pdf A prevailing wage determination starts 
with an entry level wage and progresses to a higher wage level after considering the experience, education, and skill 
requirements of the Petitioner's job opportunity. !d. 
.., 
Matter of B-P-P- PC 
A bachelor's degree is the typical entry-level requirement for management analysts. 
However, some employers prefer to hire candidates who have a master's degree in 
business administration (MBA). 
Few colleges and universities offer formal programs in management consulting. 
However, many fields of study provide a suitable education because of the range of 
areas that management analysts address. Common fields of study include business, 
management, economics, political science and government, accounting, finance, 
marketing, psychology, computer and information science, and English. 
The Handbook states that baccalaureate degrees in various fields such as business, political science, 
accounting, finance, psychology, marketing and English may be adequate for entry into this 
occupation. In general, provided the specialties are closely related, e.g., chemistry and biochemistry, 
a minimum of a bachelor's of higher degree in more than one specialty is recognized as satisfying the 
"degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent)" requirement of section 214(i)(l)(B) of the 
Act. In such a case,) the required "body of highly specialized knowledge" would essentially be the 
same. Since there must be a close correlation between the required "body of highly specialized 
knowledge" and the position, however, a minimum entry requirement of a degree in disparate fields, 
such as political science, accounting, psychology, and English, would not meet the statutory 
requirement that the degree be "in the specific specialty (or its equivalent)," unless the Petitioner 
establishes how each field is directly related to the duties and responsibilities of the particular 
position such that the required body of highly specialized knowledge is essentially an amalgamation 
of these different specialties. Section 214(i)(l )(b) (emphasis added). Here, the Petitioner has not 
done so. 
USCIS consistently interprets the term "degree" in the criteria at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to 
mean not just any baccal"ureate or higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is directly 
related to the proffered position. See Royal Siam Corp., 484 F .3d at 14 7 (describing "a degree 
requirement in a specific specialty" as "one that relates directly to the duties and responsibilities of a 
particular position"). Accordingly, the Handbook does not support the claim that the proffered 
position falls under an occupational group for which a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent is normally the minimum requirement for entry. Moreover, the Petitioner has not 
provided documentation from another probative source to substantiate its assertion regarding the 
minimum requirement for entry into this particular position. 
Thus, the Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.P.R.§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). 
2. Second Criterion 
The second criterion presents two alternative prongs: "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[.]" 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong 
8 
Matter of B-P-P- PC 
casts its gaze upon the common industry practice, while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the 
Petitioner's specific position. 
a. First Prong 
To satisfy this first prong of the second criterion, the Petitioner must establish that the "degree 
requirement" (i.e., a requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent) is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A)(2). 
In determining whether there is such a common degree requirement, factors often considered by 
USCIS include: whether the Handbook reports that the industry requires a degree; whether the 
industry's professional association has made a degree a minimum entry requirem'ent; 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. Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151, 1165 (D. Minn. 
1999)(quotingHird/BlakerCorp. v. Sava, 712F. Supp.1095, 1102(S.D.N.Y.1989)). 
As previously discussed, the Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one for which 
the Handbook; or another authoritative source, reports an industry-wide requirement for at least a 
bachelor's degree irr a specific specialty, or its equivalent. Also, there are no submissions from 
professional 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 
minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent for entry into those positions. 
Thus, the Petitioner has not . satisfied the first of the two alternative prongs of 8 C.F .R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
b. Second Prong 
The second alternative prong is satisfied if the Petitioner shows that its particular position is so 
complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with at least a bachelor's degree in 
a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2). 
In support of the petition, the Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary is well-qualified for the position, 
and references her qualifications. However, the test to establish a position as a specialty occupation 
is not the education or experience of a proposed Beneficiary, but whether the position itself requires 
at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
Upon review of the totality of the record, the Petitioner has not explained, or offered sufficient 
evidence that the duties of the position proffered here are so complex and unique that a bachelor's 
degree in a specific i. specialty is required. The Petitioner did not sufficiently develop relative 
complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the proffered position. Specifically, the Petitioner did not 
sufficiently demonstrate how the proffered position's duties as described in the record of 
9 
Matter of B-P-P- PC 
proceedings comprise a position that requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of 
highly specialized knowledge such that only a person who has attained a bachelor's or higher degree 
in a specific specialty or its equivalent is required to perform them. 
Moreover, the Petitioner designated the proffered position as an entry-level position within the 
occupational category (by selecting a Level I wage). This designation, when read in combination 
with the Petitioner's job description and the Handbook's account of the requirements for this 
occupation, further suggests that this particular position is not so complex or unique relative to other 
management analysts that the duties can only be performed by an individual with a bachelor's 
degree or higher in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. While a few related courses may be 
beneficial in performing certain duties of the position, the Petitioner has not demonstrated how an 
established curriculum of 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. On appeal, the Petitioner 
states that a degree in healthcare administration "gives the knowledge necessary to view and 
·describe a medical organization from an analytical perspective," and the curriculum is designed to 
"teach to think critically and analytically in order to make or recommend decisions, allocate 
resources, and solve complex issues in a healthcare facility." But the Petitioner does not explain 
how an entry-level management consultant who requires close supervision and monitoring will make 
recommendations and solve complex issues at its facility. 
Consequently, as the Petitioner does not demonstrate how its proffered position of management 
analyst is so complex or unique relative to other management analyst positions 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, the Petitioner has not satisfied the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 
214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2). 
3. Third Criterion 
The third criterion requires an employer to demonstrate that the position normally reqmres a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, for the position. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
The Petitioner claims that the duties of the proffered position can only be employed by a degreed 
individual. While a petitioner may assert that a proffered position requires a degree in a specific 
specialty, that statement alone without corroborating evidence cannot establish the position as a 
specialty occupation. If USCIS were 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 partic'ular position possessed a baccalaureate or higher degree 
in the specific specialty, or its equivalent. See Defensor, 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 section 214(i)(l) of the Act; 
10 
(b)(6)
Matter of B-P-P- PC 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) (defining the term "specialty occupation"). Here, the Petitioner has not 
established the referenced criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3) based on its normal hiring 
practices. 
Specifically , the Petitioner stated that the proffered position was previously held by 
who had a bachelor's degree. Upon review of resume, it appears that several of the 
duties she performed do not fall under the duties normally required of a management analyst such as 
"perform billing and coding"; "performed data entry, creating charts, feeding previous chart to the 
EMR system~ ' ; and "assisting the visiting faculty." Thus, it is not clear if was employed in 
a management analyst position. 
The Petitioner also submitted a copy of its job posting for a management analyst position that stated 
a bachelor ' s degree in "health field required." However , the posting does not list duties for the 
position; thus, we are unable to determine if it is similar to the proffered position. The Petitioner 
also did not submit documentation evidencing that the job announcement was published or posted. 
The Petitioner did not provide further documentation regarding its recruitment history for the 
proffered position. Notably , the Petitioner indicated in the H-I B petition that it was established in 
I 985. The submission of one internal posting over 30-year period is not persuasive to establish that 
the Petitioner normally requires at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
The Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to establish that it normally requires at least a 
bachelor's degree, or the equivalent , in a specific specialty for the proffered position. 8 
C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
4. Fourth Criterion 
The fourth criterion requires a petitioner to establish that 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 in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 8 C.F.R. § 
2 
I 4.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A). 
As reflected in the descriptions of the position as quoted above, the proffered position has been 
described in terms of generalized and generic functions that do not convey sufficient substantive 
information to establish the relative complexity, uniqueness, or specialization of the proffered 
position or its duties. The Petitioner's description does not convey the substantive nature of the 
work that the Beneficiary would actually perform , or any particular body of highly specialized 
knowledge that would have to be theoretically and practically applied to perform it. The 
responsibilities for the proffered position contain generalized functions without providing sufficient 
information regarding the particular work, and associated educational requirements, into--'which the 
duties would manifest themselves in their day-to-da y performance. 
II 
Matter of B-P-P- PC 
We also incorporate our earlier discussion and analysis regarding the duties of the proffered position, 
and the designation of the proffered position in the LCA as a Level I position (of the lowest of four 
assignable wage-levels) relative to others within the same occupational category. 5 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated in the record that its proffered position IS one with duties 
sufficiently specialized and complex to satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). 
The Director properly revoked 
§ 214.2(h)(11)(iii)(A)(3). Further, 
qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
IV. CONCLUSION 
the approval of the petitiOn pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 
the Petitioner did not establish that the proffered position 
The burden is on the Petitioner to show eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: _ The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of B-P-P- PC, ID# 41291 (AAO Jan. 12, 2017) 
5 The Petitioner's designation of this position as a Level I, entry-level position undermines its claim that the position is 
particularly complex, specialized, or unique compared to other positions within the same occupation_ Nevertheless, a 
Level I wage-designation does not preclude a proffered position from classification as a specialty occupation, just as a 
Level IV wage-designation does not definitively establish such a classification. In certain occupations (e.g., doctors or 
lawyers), a Level I, entry-level position would still require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or 
its equivalent, for entry. Similarly, however, a Level IV wage-designation would not reflect that an occupation qualifies 
as a specialty occupation if that higher-level position does not have an entry requirement of at least a bachelor's degree 
in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. That is, a position's wage level designation may be a relevant factor but is not 
itself conclusive evidence that a proffered position meets the requirements of section 214(i)( I) of the Act. 
12