dismissed H-1B Case: Healthcare Management

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF M-S-L-M- CORP. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: OCT. 12, 2016 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a residential care facility management company, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a part-time "program director" under the H-1B 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-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, California Service Center, denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
· Petitioner had not established that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation position. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the evidence 
submitted satisfies all evidentiary requirements. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
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: , 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
(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)(l) of the Act and 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(ii). In other words, this regulatory 
language must be construed in harmony with the thrust of the related provisions and with the statute 
as a whole. SeeK Mart Corp. v. Cartier, Inc., 486 U.S. 281, 291 (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. Fed. Sav. and Loan Ins. Corp., 489 U.S. 561 (1989); Matter ofW-F-, 
21 I&N Dec. 503 (BIA 1996). As such, the criteria stated in 8 C.P.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.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) but not the statutory or 
regulatory definition. See Defensor v. Meissner, 201 P.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). To avoid this 
result, 8 C.P.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. 1 
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.P.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 P.3d 139, 147 (1st Cir. 2007) (describing "a degree 
requirement in a specific specialty" as "one that relates directly to the duties and responsibilities of a 
particular position"). Applying this standard, USC IS regularly approves H-1 B petitions for qualified 
individuals 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 
1 We do not find the Petitioner's contrary assertions persuasive. 
2 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
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 aparticular job qualifies as a specialty occupation, USCIS does not simply 
rely on a position's title. The specific duties of the proffered position, combined with the nature of 
the petitioning entity's business operations, are factors to be considered. USCIS must examine the 
ultimate employment of the individual, 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 or 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. 
II. PROFFERED POSITION 
In the H-lB petition, the Petitioner stated that the proffered position is a program director position. 
The Petitioner provided the following description of the duties of the proffered position: 
· *Manage consultant service for residents at each facility. Arrange for residents to 
attend available community programs identified in the individualized needs and 
service plans. Coordinate use of professional consultants such as behavior therapist, 
recreational therapist, registered nurse, occupational therapist, etc. Oversee 
screening, selection, complete admission procedures, and program assignment of 
participants. Implement injury and illness prevention program. Oversee participant 
assessment and ISP (individual service plan) development and implementation. 
*Recruit and hire staff for each facility. 
*Oversee training program of staff. Provide or arrange for orientation, continuing 
education and on-the-job training of staff. 
*Determine staff schedule based on the individualized needs and services plan of the 
residents. 
*Oversee accurate and timely participant billing, participant payroll, and personal 
documents. Maintain and supervise the maintenance of personnel, financial and 
resident record. Develop and implement administrative policy and procedures. 
*Ensure compliance with quality assurance standards and care requirements. 
The Petitioner stated, "The minimum academic requirement for this position is a Bachelor of 
Science degree in any area of Health Sciences, Health Administration or related field." 
In a letter subl]1itted in response to a request for evidence (Rf'E) issued in this matter, the Petitioner 
provided the following duties (note: errors in the original text have not been changed): 
3 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
1. Management of Individual Service Programs: 80% 20 hrs/week 
• Responsible for the supervision of individuals' supports and maintenance of 
assigned programs. 
• Facilitates the planning, development and implementation of person-centen~d 
plans by developing programs based on residents' individual goals and desired 
outcomes, and coordinating and participating in individual plan meetings with 
professional consultants. Confers with parents, relatives and staff regarding a 
resident's program plan and how they can aid in promoting functional growth. 
• Directs and coordinates the activities of all program, treatment and teaching of 
individuals in assigned homes/locations. Schedule and coordinate the necessary 
support services such as dietary, recreation, housekeeping, clothing and 
transportation to ensure quality of life for residents. 
• Oversees the development and maintenance of integrated and coordinated active 
treatment program for each individual resident. Monitors the implementation of 
each program, and documents and reports progress toward meeting outcomes 
through communications with professional consultants and other service 
agencies. Makes recommendations for additional types of actiyities. 
• Identifies and requests specialized services for residents such as physical 
therapy, hearing and spyech, psychiatric, medical, dental, vocational 
assessments and psychological testing. 
• Oversees the Quality Assurance plarts to monitor the implementation of each 
program to ensure active treatment. 
• Schedules and conducts pre-release conferences concerning residents and makes 
rec~mmendations as to the type of placement, location, physical needs, 
activities, and degree of needed supervision. 
• Maintains relationships with Federal, State and County service agencies. Acts 
as liaison between the facility and community schools and workshop programs. 
2. Supervision and Administrative Duties: 20% 5 hrs/week 
• In coordination with the owner, manages personnel by hiring, evaluating, 
supervising and helping to develop the most qualified individuals to work as 
direct support professionals. 
• Provides effective and efficient scheduling of staff to meet the needs and goals 
of individuals supported and provides on-call 24 hour staff assistance. 
• Oversee and provide staff training and supervision to ensure that staff provides 
quality active care and treatment according to regulations and policy following 
established routines. Assess areas requiring more training and ensure that 
training programs are provided. 
• Ensure Basic Assurances requirements are met. Ensures current state licensing 
and ce,rtification rules and regulations, accreditation requirements and agency 
policies and procedures are followed. 
4 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
• Manages and implement program budgets. Provide input for budget 
development. Ensure programs stay within allocated budget and follow policies 
and procedures for procurement. 
• Maintain resident records and personnel records. 
III. ANALYSIS 
Upon review of the record in its totality and for the reasons set out below, we determine that the 
Petitioner has not_, demonstrated that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation.2 
Specifically, the record does not establish that the job duties require an educational background, or 
its equivalent, commensurate with a specialty occupation. 3 
Initially, we observe that the Petitioner has never effectively claimed that the proffered position 
requires a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. To the contrary, 
the Petitioner stated that it would find acceptable a degree in any 'of the health sciences, in health 
administration, or in a related field. While we do not claim to provide an exhaustive list of all of the 
health sciences, we note that the list would include, for instance, the diverse fields of anesthesiology, 
audiology, dentistry, genetic counseling, medical physics, medical technology, midwifery, nursing, 
dietetics, occupational therapy, optometry, pharmacology, physical therapy, psychiatry, and speech­
language pathology. 
In general, provided the specialties are closely related, e.g., chemistry and biochemistry, a minimum 
of a bachelor's or 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 two disparate fields, such as 
philosophy and engineering, 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) ofthe Act (emphasis added). 
In other words, while the statutory "the" and the regulatory "a" both denote a singular "specialty," 
we do not so narrowly interpret these provisions to exclude positions from qualifying as specialty 
occupations if they permit, as a minimum entry requirement, degrees in more than one closely 
related specialty. See section 214(i)(l)(B) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). This also includes 
even seemingly disparate specialties providing, again, the evidence of record establishes how each 
2 Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap, we will address each of the criteria individually. 
3 The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H-1 8 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. 
5 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
acceptable, specific field of study is directly related to the duties and responsibilities ofthe particular 
position. 
Again, the Petitioner claims that the duties of the proffered pos1t10n can be performed by an 
individual with a bachelor's degree in, among other subjects, any medical science, a general 
category which would include, for example, dentistry, genetic counseling, midwifery, and speech­
language pathology. Those subjects do not delineate a single specific specialty. 'The educational 
requirement placed on the proffered position by the Petitioner demonstrates that the proffered 
position in the instant case is not a specialty occupation position. The proffered position is not a 
specialty occupation for this reason alone. 
Nevertheless, we will continue our analysis of whether the proffered position qualifies as a specialty 
occupation for the purpose of performing a comprehensive analysis. We will next discuss the record 
of proceedings in relation to the four criteria at 8 C.P.R.§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). We will conduct this 
analysis pursuant to the assumption, made arguendo, that the wide variety of degrees the Petitioner 
indicates would be a sufficient educational qualification for the proffered position does not 
disqualify it from being found to be a specialty occupation position. 
A. First Criterion 
We tum first to the criterion at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(J), 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 ofLabor'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.4 
On the labor condition application (LCA) submitted in support of the H-1B petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the occupational category SOC 11-9111, Medical and Health 
Services Managers. 5 The Handbook states the following with regard to positions located within this 
occupational category: 
4 All of our references are to the 2016-2017 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 USCIS 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. 
5 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 she 
will be closely supervised and her work closely monitored and reviewed for accuracy; and (3) that she will receive 
specific instructions on required tasks and expected results. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing 
6 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
Most medical and health services managers have at least a bachelor's ,degree before 
entering the field. However, master's degrees are common and sometimes preferred 
by employers. Educational requirements vary by facility. 
Education 
Medical and health services managers typically need at least a bachelor's degree to 
enter the occupation. However, master's degrees are common and sometimes 
preferred by employers. Graduate programs often last between 2 and 3 years and 
may include up to 1 year of supervised administrative experience in a hospital or 
healthcare consulting setting. 
Prospective medical and health services managers typically have a degree in health 
administration, health management, nursing, public health administration, or business 
administration. Degrees that focus on both management and healthcare combine 
business-related courses with courses in medical terminology, hospital organization, 
and health information systems. For example, a degree in health administration or 
health information management often includes courses in health services 
management, accounting and budgeting, human resources administration, strategic 
planning, law and ethics, health economics, and health information systems. 
Work Experience in a Related Occupation 
Many employers require prospective medical and health services managers to have 
some work experience in either an administrative or a clinical role in a hospital or 
other healthcare facility. For example, nursing home administrators usually have 
years of experience working as a registered nurse. 
Others may begin their careers as medical records and health information technicians, 
administrative assistants, or financial clerks within a healthcare office. 
Licenses, Certifications, and Registrations 
All states require licensure for nursing home administrators;· requirements vary by 
state. In most states, these administrators must have a bachelor's degree, complete a 
state-approved training program, and pass a national licensing exam. Some states also 
require applicants to pass a state-specific exam; others may require applicants to have 
previous work experience in a healthcare facility. Some states also require licensure 
Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http://flcdatacenter.com/download/NPWHC _Guidance_ Revised _I I_ 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. 
7 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
for administrators in assisted-living facilities. For information on specific state-by­
state licensure requirements, visit the National Association of Long Term Care 
Administrator Boards. 
A license is typically not required in other areas of medical and health services 
management. However, some positions may require applicants to have a registered 
nurse or social worker license. 
Although certification is not required, some managers choose to become certified. 
Certification is available in many areas of practice. For example, the Professional 
Association, of Health Care Office Management offers certification in medical 
management, the American Health Information Management Association offers 
health information management certification, and the American College of Health 
Care Administrators offers the Certified Nursing Home Administrator and Certified 
Assisted Living Administrator distinctions. 
Advancement 
Medical and health services managers advance by moving into higher paying 
positions with more responsibility. Some health information managers, for example, 
can advance to become responsible for the entire hospital's information systems. 
Other managers may advance to top executive positions within the organization. 
U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2016-17 ed., 
Medical and Health Services Managers, http://www.bls.gov/oohlmanagement/medical-and-health­
services-managers.htm#tab-4 (last visited Oct. 11, 2016).6 
According to the Handbook, the requirements for medical and health services managers vary by 
facility. The Handbook also states that medical and health services managers typically need an 
advanced degree to enter the occupation, but it further clarifies that the degrees are in various fields 
of study (health administration, health management, nursing, public health administration, or 
business administration). In addition, the Handbook reports that degrees that focus on both 
management and healthcare combine business-related courses with courses in medical terminology, 
hospital organization, and health information systems. For example, the Handbook states that a 
degree in health administration or health information management often includes courses in health 
services management, accounting and budgeting, human resources administration, strategic 
planning, law and ethics, health economics, and health information systems. Therefore, although the 
6 It is not entirely clear that the proffered position was properly classified as being located within this occupational 
category. For example, we observe that the Petitioner's organizational chart indicates the Beneficiary would be 
supervised by an Administrator/Licensee and a Co-Administrator/Licensee. The duties those two workers provide has 
not been established. However, that two administrators are above the Beneficiary in the chain of command suggests that 
the duties the Beneficiary would perform may not involve management at the level contemplated by the Handbook's 
discussion of Medical and Health Services Manager positions. As the petition is otherwise unapprovable, we will not 
pursue this issue further, except to nqte that it raises questions as to whether the LCA corresponds to and supports the H­
I B petition. 
8 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
Handbook states that medical and health services managers typically need an advanced degree, it 
also specifies that the requirements for these positions vary by facility and that degrees in various 
fields are acceptable for jobs in this occupation (e.g., health administration; health management, 
nursing, public health administration, and business administration). 
Again, provided the specialties are closely related, e.g., chemistry and biochemistry, a minimum of a 
bachelor's or 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 two disparate fields, such as 
philosophy and engineering, 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) ofthe Act (emphasis added). 
The Handbook also states that a degree in business administration is sufficient for medical and 
health services manager jobs. Although a general-purpose bachelor's degree, such as a degree in 
business administration, may be a legitimate prerequisite for a particular position, requiring such a 
degree, without more, will not justify a finding that a particular position qualifies for classification as 
a specialty occupation. Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d at 147. 
Again, USC IS interprets the degree requirement at 8 C.F .R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)( A) to require a degree 
in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proposed position. Since there must be a close 
correlation between the required specialized studies and the position, the requirement of a degree 
with a generalized title, such as business administration, without further specification, does not 
establish the position as a specialty occupation. Cf Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. 
558, 560 (Comm'r 1988). Therefore, the Handbook's recognition that a general, non-specialty 
degree in business administration is sufficient for entry into the occupation strongly suggests that a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty is not normally the minimum entry requirement for this 
occupation. 
The narrative of the Handbook further indicates that nursing care facility administrators and 
administrators in assisted-living facilities may be subject to state licensure requirements. The 
Handbook reports that a license is not required in other areas of medical and health services 
management; however, certification is available in many areas of practice and that some employees 
obtain professional certification. The Handbook notes that the Professional Association of Health 
Care Office Management (P AHCOM) provides certification in medical management, that the 
American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA) offers health information 
management certification, and that the American College of Health Care Administrators (ACHCA) 
provides the Certified Assisted Living Administrator and Certified Nursing Home Administrator 
distinctions. 
9 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
We reviewed the PAHCOM website regarding its requirements for professional certification." 7 
The PAHCOM website states that its Certified Medical Manager (CMM) and its Health Information 
Technology Certified Manager for Physician Practice (HITCM-PP) certifications are nationally 
recognized as the standards of excellence in physician office management. It further indicates that 
the programs provide recognition to office managers having the knowledge, skills, and experience 
necessary to successfully manage today's medical practices. The requirements for certification 
include: 
• A minimum of three years of experience in the health care field (must be in support of patient 
care, such as a medical practice or other clinical environment); and, 
• Twelve college credit hours in courses (1) pertinent to healthcare or business management 
for the CMM credential; or (2) pertinent to healthcare, business management, or information 
technology for the HITCM-PP credential. The educational credit requirement is reduced by 
one hour for each year experience above the three year minimum. 
The P AHCOM website states that its credentialing program recognizes the qualifications and 
expertise of medical managers of physician practices. It specifically notes that the credential is not 
an entry level certification; but, rather, that the CMM designation is the most senior in the industry, 
requiring both experience and education. 
However, the P AHCOM website does not indicate that medical manager pos1t10ns have any 
particular degree requirements for entry, nor does it indicate that these positions require a degree to 
be identified as qualified and possessing a level of expertise/competence. Instead, P AHCOM 
stresses the importance of professional experience, along with a few courses in healthcare, business 
management and/or information technology. 
We also reviewed the AHIMA website regarding its health information management certification. 8 
The AHIMA website states that it is the premier association of health information management 
(HIM) professionals worldwide. The website also states that AHIMA credentials are earned through 
a challenging program of examinations, education, and experience, and maintained through 
continuous review and education. 
The AHIMA website indicates that there are two types of HIM certifications: (1) Registered Health 
Information Administrator (RHIA) certification; and (2) Registered Health Information Technician 
(RHIT) certification. According to the website, RHIA applicants must meet one of the following 
eligibility requirements: ' 
7 For additional information regarding PAHCOM and its credentialing programs, see the Professional Association of 
Health Care Office Management website at https://www.pahcom.com (last visited Oct. II, 20\16). 
8 For additional information regarding AHIMA and its certification program, see the American Health Information 
Management Association website at http://www.ahima.org/ (last visited Oct. II, 20 16) 
10 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
• Complete the academic requirements, at the baccalaureate level, of an HIM program 
accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for Health Informatics and Information 
Management Education (CAHIIM); or 
• Graduate from an HIM program approved by a foreign association with which AHIMA has a 
reciprocity agreement. 
In addition, RHIT applicants must meet one of the following requirements: 
• Complete the academic requirements, at an associate's degree level, of an HIM program 
accredited by the CAHIIM; or 
• Graduate from an HIM program approved by a foreign association with which AHIMA has a 
reciprocity agreement. 
However, the AHIMA website does not indicate that at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty (or its equivalent) is required to work as a health information management professional 
and/or be HIM certified. 
Finally, we reviewed the ACHCA website regarding the Certified Assisted Living Administrator and 
Certified Nursing Home Administrator distinctions.9 According to ACHCA, its professional 
certification program identifies and honors administrators and managers who are performing at an 
advanced level of skill and knowledge. The website states that its professional certification program 
promotes quality in the profession and improves the public image of administrators, as well as 
allows experienced and practicing administrators to validate their knowledge, skill and abilities. 
The AOf:ICA website indicates that there are a number of paths available to candidates seeking to 
fulfill the education and experience requirements for the Certified Assisted Living Administrator 
distinction. These include possessing: ( 1) a high school diploma or General Education Diploma 
(G.E.D.) along with six years of full-time experience as an assisted living administrator/manager; (2) 
an associate's degree and four years of full-time experience as an assisted living 
administrator/manager; or (3) a baccalaureate degree and two years of full-time experience as an 
assisted living administrator/manager. Thus, the ACHCA website does not indicate that at least a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty (or its equivalent) is required to work as an assisted living 
administrator/manager- or for certification. 
The requirements for the Certified Nursing Home Administrator distinction include the following: 
(1) two year licensure as a nursing home administrator; (2) two years of experience as a nursing 
home administrator; and (3) a baccalaureate degree if licensed after January 1, 1996. We note that a 
9 For additional information regarding ACHCA and its certification programs, see the American College of Health Care 
Administrators website at http://www.achca.org/ (last visited Oct. II, 20I6). 
L 
11 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
candidate is not required to have a degree in a specific specialty, but rather a degree in any field or a 
general-purpose degree is sufficient. 
Thus, the Handbook, P AHCOM, AHIMA, and ACHCA do not support the claim that the "Medical 
and Health Services Managers" occupational category is one for which normally the minimum 
requirement for entry is a baccalaureate degree (or higher) in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. Even if it did (which it does not), to satisfy the first criterion, the Petitioner would still 
need to provide evidence to support a finding that the particular position proffered would normally 
have such a minimum, specialty degree requirement, or its equivalent. 
Qn appeal, the Petitioner submitted a copy of the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) 
OnLine Summary Report for the "Medical and Health Services Managers" occupational category. 
However, O*NET does not establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
In general, O*NET is not particularly useful in determining whether a baccalaureate degree in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent, is a standard entry requirement for a given position, as O*NET 
Job Zone designations make no mention of the specific field of study from which a degree must 
come. Furthermore, the Specialized Vocational Preparation (SVP) ratings, which are cited within 
O*NET's Job Zone designations, are meant to indicate only the total number of years ofvocational 
preparation required for a particular position. The SVP ratings do not describe how those years are 
to be divided among training, formal education, and experience and it does not specify the particular 
type of degree, if any, that a position would require. Therefore, O*NET does not establish that the 
proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
Further, we find that, to the extent that they are described in the record of proceedings, the numerous 
duties that the Petitioner ascribes to the proffered position indicate a need for a range of knowledge 
and abilities, such as scheduling appointments, conducting interviews, and similar duties, but do not 
establish any particular level of formal, postsecondary ed~cation leading to a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty as minimally necessary to attain such knowledge. 
In the instant case, the duties and requirements of the position as described in the record of 
proceeding do not indicate that this particular position proffered by the Petitioner is one for which a 
baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry. 
Thus, the Petitioner has not satis'fied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). 
B. 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.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong 
casts its gaze upon the common industry practice, while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the 
Petitioner's specific position. 
12 
Matter ofM-S-L-M- Corp. 
1. 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. 
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 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, 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)). 
Here and as already discussed, the· Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one for 
which the Handbook (or other independent, authoritative source) reports an industry-wide 
requirement for at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. Thus, we 
incorporate by reference the previous discussion on the matter. Also, there are no submissions from 
the industry's professional association indicating that it has made a degree a minimum entry 
requirement. 
The Petitioner provided two. letters written other individuals working in facilities which care for 
clients with developmental disabilities. One letter states, "A Program Director for residential care 
facilities like ours requires a minimum of Bachelor Degree in Psychology." The other letter states, 
"To be a Program Director of a Day Program for adults with Developmental Disabilities and 
Behavior Management, it is a plus to be a Medical Professional such as a holder of a Bachelor's 
Degree in Psychology." 
Thus, one letter states that a psychology degree is a minimum requirement for such a position, and 
the other indicates that such a degree would be "a plus," but not necessarily a minimum requirement 
for entry. 
The Petitioner also provided vacancy announcements for positions entitled Program Director, 
Program Manager - Autism Services, Program Manager - Supported Living Services, Program 
Manager Community Living Services, Director, Day Program Manager, Program Manager for 
Adults with Developmental Disabilities, Program Manager - Developmental Services, Program 
Manager - DT &H (Day Training and Habilitation) Employment Services, Program Director of 
Community Living Services, and Program Director for Adult Residential Facilities. 
Some of the vacancy announcements state a requirement for a bachelor's degree, but not for a degree 
in any specific specialty. One states that the position requires a "Bachelor's Degree in Psychology, 
Social Work or any major which includes at least 24 semester college units in one or more of the 
following subject areas: a) psychology, b) social work, c) sociology, d) behavioral health sciences, 
13 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
or e) psychiatric nursing." A requirement for a degree with less than two semesters of credits in that 
wide array of subjects is not a requirement of a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent. 
One of the announcements indicates that the advertised position is open to someone who is a 
registered nurse with one year of experience or a licensed nursing home administrator with one year 
of experience, or a licensed psychiatric technician with five years of experience. The record 
contains no indication that any of those qualifications equate to a minimum of a bachelor's degree in 
a specific specialty or its equivalent. 
One of the announcements states that the position announced requires a bachelor's degree (with no 
major specified) or two years of administrative/program experience. Neither of those alternative 
requirements is a requirement of a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its 
equivalent. 
Finally, even if all of the vacancy announcements were for parallel positions with organizations 
similar to the Petitioner and in the Petitioner's industry and required a minimum of a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent, the Petitioner has not demonstrated what statistically 
valid inferences, if any, can be drawn from a small number of announcements with regard to the 
common educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations. 10 
Thus, the evidence of record does not establish that a requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in 
a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common to parallel positions with organizations that are in 
the Petitioner's industry and otherwise similar to the Petitioner. The Petitioner has not, therefore, 
satisfied the criterion ofthe first alternative prong of8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
2. Second Prong 
I 
We will next consider the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2), which 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. 
Even when considering the Petitioner's general descriptions of the proffered position's duties, the 
evidence of record does not establish why a few related courses or industry experience alone is 
insufficient preparation for the proffered position. While a few related courses may be beneficial, or 
10 USCIS "must examine each piece of evidence for relevance, probative value, and credibility, both individually and 
within the context of the totality of the evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is probably true." Matter of 
Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). As just discussed, the Petitioner has not established the relevance ofthe 
job advertisements submitted to the position proffered in this case. Even if their relevance had been established, the 
Petitioner still would not have demonstrated what inferences, if any, can be drawn from these few job postings ~ith 
regard to determining the common educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations in 
the same industry. See generally Earl Babbie, The Practice of Social Research 186-228 (1995). 
14 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
even required, 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. The 
description of the duties does not specifically identify any tasks that are so complex or unique that 
only a specifically degreed individual could perform them. The record lacks sufficiently detailed 
information to distinguish the proffered position as more 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. 
Therefore, the evidence of record does not establish that this position is significantly different from 
other positions in the occupation such that it refutes the Handbook's information to the effect that 
there is a spectrum of degrees acceptable for such positions, including degrees not in a specific 
specialty. In other words, the record lacks sufficiently detailed information to distinguish the 
proffered position as unique from or more complex than positions that can be performed by persons 
without at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. As the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate how the proffered position is so complex or unique relative to other positions within the 
same occupational category that do not require at least a baccalaureate degree in a specific specialty 
or its equivalent for entry into the occupation in the United States, it cannot be concluded that the 
Petitioner has satisfied the second alternative prong of 8 C.F .R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2). 
This is further evidenced by the LCA submitted by the Petitioner in support of the instant 
petition. As noted above, the Petitioner attested on the submitted LCA that the wage level for the 
proffered position is a Level I (entry-level) wage. Such a wage level is for a position which only 
requires a basic understanding of the occupation; the performance of routine tasks that require 
limited, if any, exercise of judgment; close supervision and work closely monitored and reviewed for 
accuracy; and the receipt of specific instructions on required tasks and expected results, and is 
contrary to a position that requires the performance of complex duties. 11 
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. The Petitioner did not sufficiently develop relative 
complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the duties of the position, and it did not identify any tasks 
that are so complex or unique that only a specifically degreed individual could perform them. 
11 The issue here is that 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, it is important to note that a Level I wage-designation does not preclude a proffered position 
from classification as a specialty occupation. In certain occupations (doctors or lawyers, for example), an 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 consideration but is not a substitute for 
a determination of whether a proffered position meets the requirements of section 2 I 4(i)( 1) of the Act. 
15 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
Accordingly, the Petitioner has not satisfied the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
C. Third Criterion 
The third criterion of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) entails an employer demonstrating that it 
normally requires a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, for the position. 
The Petitioner has not expressly asserted eligibility under this criterion. Although the Petitioner 
stated, on the H-lB petition, that it was established in 2002, it has not submitted evidence pertinent 
to anyone it employed in the position in the past or identified the person who performed the duties of 
the proffered position before the Petitioner hired the Beneficiary. 
A first-time hiring for a position is not a basis for precluding a position from recognition as a 
specialty occupation. However, absent evidence pertinent to the educational credentials of the 
people who have previously performed the duties of the proffered position, it is unclear how an 
employer would be able to satisfy the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3), which requires a 
demonstration that it normally requires at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its 
equivalent for the position. We cannot conclude that the Petitioner has satisfied the third criterion of 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 12 
D. Fourth Criterion 
The fourth criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) 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. 
In the instant case, relative specialization and complexity have not been sufficiently developed by 
the Petitioner as an aspect of the proffered position. The duties of the proffered position, such as 
managing consulting services, arranging for residents to attend community programs, overseeing 
patient screening, selection, admission and pro,gram assignments, implementing injury and illness 
prevention programs, etc., contaip insufficient indication of a nature so specialized and complex that 
12 While a petitioner may believe or otherwise assert that a proffered position requires a degree in a specific specialty, 
that opinion alone without corroborating evidence cannot establish the position as a specialty occupation. Were USCIS 
limited solely to reviewing a petitioner's claimed self-imposed requirements, then any individual with a 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. See Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F. 3d at 387. In other words, if a 
petitioner's degree requirement is only symbolic and the proffered position does not in fact require such a specialty 
degree or its equivalent to perform its duties, the occupation would not meet the statutory or regulatory definition of a 
specialty occupation. See section 214(i)(l) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(ii) (defining the term "specialty 
occupation"). 
16 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
they require knowledge usually associated with attainment of a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty or its equivalent. 
We again refer to our earlier comments and findings with regard to the implication of the Petitioner's 
designation of the proffered position in the LCA as a Level I (the lowest of four assignable levels) 
wage. That is, the Level I wage designation is indicative of a low, entry-level position relative to 
others within the occupational category, and hence one not likely distinguishable by relatively 
specialized and complex duties. 13 
Upon review of the totality of the record, the Petitioner has not established that the nature of the 
specific duties is so specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform the duties is 
usually associated with the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or 
its equivalent. 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). 
E. The Case Law Cited by the Petitioner 
1. Tapis Int 'l 
The Petitioner cites to Tapis Int'l v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 94 F. Supp. 2d 172 (D. 
Mass. 2000) which is often cited for the proposition that '"[t]he United States District Court [in 
Tapis] has held that in positions where an employer requires a Bachelor's degree, but does not 
specify a field, the regulatory definition of specialty occupation may be satisfied by looking at a 
combination of education with experience in a specific field." 
Specifically, in Tapis, the U.S. district court found that while the former Immigration and 
Naturalization Service (INS) was reasonable in requiring a bachelor's degree in a specific field, it 
abused its discretion by ignoring the portion of the regulations that allows for the equivalent of a 
specialized baccalaureate degree. According to the U.S. district court, INS's interpretation was not 
reasonable because then H-lB visas would only be available in fields where a specific degree was 
offered, ignoring the statutory definition allowing for "various combinations of academic and 
experience based training." Tapis Int 'l v. INS, 94 F. Supp. 2d at 176. The court elaborated that "[i]n 
fields where no specifically tailored baccalaureate program exists, the only possible way to achieve 
something equivalent is by studying a related field (or fields) and then obtaining specialized 
experience." Id. at 177. 
We agree with the district court judge in Tapis, that in satisfying the specialty occupation 
requirements, both the Act and the regulations require a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or 
its equivalent, and that this language indicates that the degree does not have to be a degree in a single 
specific specialty. Since there must be a close correlation between the required "body of highly 
13 Again, 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. 
17 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
specialized knowledge" and the position, however, a minimum entry requirement ot a degree in 
disparate fields, such as philosophy and engineering, 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)(1)(B) of the Act (emphasis added). 
Moreover, we also agree that, if the requirements to perform the duties and job responsibilities of a 
proffered position are a combination of a general bachelor's degree and experience .such that the 
standards at both section 214(i)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act have been satisfied, then the proffered 
position may qualify as a specialty occupation. We do not find, however, that the U.S. district court 
is stating that any position can qualify as a specialty occupation based solely on the ch:timed 
requirements of a p~titioner. \ 
Instead, USCIS must examine the actual employment requirements, and, on the basis of that 
examination, determine whether the position qualifies as a specialty occupation. See generally 
Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F. 3d 384. In this pursuit, the critical element is not the title of the 
position, or the fact that an employer has routinely insisted on certain educational standards, but 
whether performance of 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 a 
specific specialty as the minimum for entry into the occupation as required by the Act. 
In addition, the district court judge does not state in Tapis that, simply because there is no specialty 
degree requirement for entry into a particular position in a given occupational category, users must 
recognize such a position as a specialty occupation if the beneficiary has the equivalent of a 
bachelor's degree in that field. In other words, we do not find that Tapis stands for either (1) that a 
specialty occupation is determined by the qualifications of a beneficiary being petitioned to perform 
it; or (2) that a position may qualify as a specialty occupation even when there is no specialty degree 
requirement, or its equivalent, for entry into a particular position in a given occupational category. 
First, USCIS cannot determine if a particular job is a specialty occupation based on the qualifications 
of a beneficiary. A beneficiary's credentials to perform a particular job are relevant only when the 
job is first found to qualify as a specialty occupation. C.f Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N 
Dec. at 560. 
Second, in promulgating the H -1 B 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." Temporary Alien Workers Seeking 
Classification Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, 56 Fed. Reg. 61,111, 61,112 (Dec. 2, 
1991) (to be codified at 8 C.F.R. pt. 214). 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. 
18 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
In any event, the Petitioner has furnished no evidence to establish that the facts of the instant petition 
are analogous to those in Tapis. In contrast to the broad precedential authority of the case law of a 
United States circuit court, we are not bound to follow the published decision of a United States 
district' court in matters arising even within the same district. See Matter of K-S-, 20 I&N Dec. 715, 
719-20 (BIA 1993). Although the reasoning underlying a district judge's decision will be given due 
consideration when it is properly before us, the analysis does not have to be followed as a matter of 
law. ld. 
2. Residential Finance 
Next, the Petitioner cites to Residential Finance Corp. v. USCIS, 839 F. Supp. 2d 985 (S.D. Ohio 
2012), which is often cited for the proposition that "[t]he knowledge and not the title of the degree is 
what is important. Diplomas rarely come bearing occupation-specific majors. What is required is an 
occupation that requires highly specialized knowledge and a prospective employee who has attained 
the credentialing indicating possession of that knowledge." 
For the reasons just discussed, we agree that "[t]he knowledge and not the title of the degree is what 
is important." For the aforementioned reasons, however, the Petitioner has not met its burden to 
establish that the particular position offered in this matter requires a bachelor's or higher degree in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent, directly related to its duties in order to perform those tasks. It is 
important to note that in a subsequent case reviewed in the same jurisdiction, the court agreed with 
our analysis of Residential Fin. Corp. See Health Carousel, LLC v. US. Citizenship & Immigration 
Services, No. 1:13-CV-23, 2014 WL 29591,2014 WL 29591 (S.D. Ohio 2014). 
The Petitioner has also furnished no evidence to establish that the facts of the instant petition are 
analogous to those in Residential Finance.14 See Matter of K-S-, 20 I&N Dec. at 719-20. 
3. Unpublished AAO Decisions 
Finally, the Petitioner refers to unpublished decisions in which we determined that the positions 
proffered in those matters qualified as a specialty occupation. When "any person makes application 
for a visa or any other document required for entry, or makes application for admission, ... the 
burden of proof shall be upon such person to establish that he is eligible" for such benefit. Section 
291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; see also Matter ofTreasure Craft ofCal., 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg'l 
Comm'r 1972). Furthermore, any suggestion that USCIS must review unpublished decisions and 
possibly request and review each cas~ file relevant to those decisions, while being impractical and 
14 It is noted that the district judge's decision in that case appears to have been based largely on the many factual errors 
made by the Director in the decision denying the petition. We further note that the Director's decision was not appealed 
to us. Based on the district court's findings and description of the record, if that matter had first been appealed through 
the available administrative process, we may very well have remanded the matter to the service center for a new decision 
for many of the same reasons articulated by the district court if these errors could not have been remedied by us in our de 
novo review of the matter. 
19 
Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp. 
inefficient, would also be a shift in the evidentiary burden in these proceedings from the Petitioner to 
USCIS, which would be contrary to section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Accordingly, neither 
the Director nor our office was required to request and/or obtain a copy of the unpublished decisions 
cited by the Petitioner, and the Petitioner did not submit a copy of the unpublished decisions. While 
8 C.F .R. § 103 .3( c) provides that our precedent decisions are binding on all US CIS employees in the 
administration of the Act, unpublished decisions are not similarly binding. 
IV. CONCLUSION 
Because the Petitioner has not satisfied one of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), it has not 
demonstrated that the proffered ~osition qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
The burden is on the Petitioner to show eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter ofOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 (BIA 2013). Here, that burden 
has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of M-S-L-M- Corp., ID# 123137 (AAO Oct. 12, 2016) 
20