dismissed H-1B Case: Information Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 9479567 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (H-1B) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG . 13, 2020 
The Petitioner, a global product development and services company, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a "project manager" 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 of the California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the evidence of 
record does not establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. The matter is 
now before us on appeal. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate el igibi I ity by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Section 291 of the Act; Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). We review the 
questions in this matter de nova. See Matter of Christa's Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). 
Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
Section 214(i)(I) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1184(i)(I), 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. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). We construe the term "degree" to mean not just any baccalaureate or 
higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proposed position. See Royal 
Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d 139, 147 (1st Cir. 2007) (describing "a degree requirement in a specific 
specialty" as "one that relates directly to the duties and responsibilities of a particular position"). 
11. THE PROFFERED POSITION 
The Petitioner states that it is a "global product development consultancy and services company" that 
partners with various technology companies to provide services such as "Robotic Process Automation 
(RPA), Intelligent Automation (IA), Machine Learning (ML) and Artificial Intelligence (Al)." 
In a letter submitted in support of the petition, the Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary will "utilize 
his education and project management expertise to perform the following tasks in connection with [the 
Petitioner's] projects" as follows: 
I Ensure that all projects are delivered on-time, within scope and within budget. 
I Define the project scope and objectives, involve relevant stakeholders, and analyze 
technical feasibility. 
I Solicit, maintain and oversee resource availability, allocation and billing. 
I Collaborate with internal resources, clients, and third-party vendors over the course 
of the project's execution. 
I Manage the relationship with the client and stakeholders. 
I Develop and maintain detailed project plans to monitor and track progress. 
I Identify and manage changes to the project scope, schedule and costs. 
I Measure, report and discuss project performance and delivery milestones. 
I Identify, manage and report on risks faced by projects, and escalate to management 
as appropriate. 
I Develop status reports, process flow diagrams and business process maps to 
document requirements and end-sate solutions. 
2 
The Petitioner stated that it requires "at least a baccalaureate degree or the equivalent in business 
administration or computer science, or a related field" for the proffered position. 
In its response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner provided different duties 
and indicated the percentages of time the Beneficiary would devote to each duty. For the sake of 
brevity, we will not quote the modified version of the duties provided in the RFE response; however, 
we have closely reviewed and considered them. 
Ill. ANALYSIS 
Upon review of the record in its totality and for the reasons discussed below, we have determined that 
the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation.1 
Specifically, we conclude that the record does not establish that the job duties require an educational 
background, or its equivalent, commensurate with a specialty occupation. 
A. First Criterion 
We turn first to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii){A)(1), 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 will consider the information contained 
in the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) regarding the 
duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations it addresses. 2 
In the labor condition application (LCA), the Petitioner classified the proffered position under the 
occupational title ""Computer Occupations -All Other," corresponding to the Standard Occupational 
Classification (SOC) code 15-1199. 3 In response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner asserted that the 
duties of the proffered position are consistent with the duties of the "Information Technology Project 
Managers" occupation, SOC code 15-1199.09. 
The Handbook is a career resource offering information on hundreds of occupations. However, there are 
occupational categories which the Handbook does not cover in detail, and instead provides only summary 
1 The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H-1B 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. 
2 All of our references to the Handbook may be accessed at the Internet site http://www.bls.gov/ooh/. We consider the 
information in the Handbook regarding the duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it 
addresses. 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 we regularly review the Handbook on the duties and educational requirements 
of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses. However, the burden of proof remains on the Petitioner to submit 
sufficient evidence to establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
3 A petitioner submits the LCA to the Department of Labor (DOL) to demonstrate that it will pay an H-1B worker the 
higher of either the prevailing wage for the occupational classification in the area of employment or the actual wage paid 
by the employer to other employees with similar duties, experience, and qualifications. Section 212(n)(1) of the Act; 
20 C.F.R. § 655.731(a). 
3 
data.4 The subchapter of the Handbook titled "Data for Occupations Not Covered in Detail" states, in 
relevant part, that the "[t]ypical entry-level education" for "Information Technology Project Managers" 
is a "Bachelor's degree," without indicating that the bachelor's degree must be in a specific specialty.5 
Thus, the Handbook is not probative in establishing that these positions comprise an occupational group 
for which normally the minimum requirement for entry is at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty, or its equivalent. 
We have also reviewed the DOL's O*NET summary report for "Information Technology Project 
Managers."6 The summary report provides general information regarding the occupation. For example, 
the Specialized Vocational Preparation (SVP) rating cited within O*NET's Job Zone Four rating 
designates this occupation as 7 < 8. An SVP rating of 7 to less than("<") 8 indicates that the occupation 
requires "over 2 years up to and including 4 years" of training.7 While the SVP rating indicates the total 
number of years of vocational preparation required for a particular position, it is important to note that it 
does 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.8 We have 
considered the Petitioner's reference to the O*NET's summary report of the educational requirements of 
"respondents" and its claim that 100 percent of respondents report a bachelor's degree is required.9 
However, the respondents' positions within this occupation are not distinguished by career level (e.g., 
entry-level, mid-level, senior-level). Additionally, the graph in the summary report does not indicate that 
the "education level" for the respondents must be in a specific specialty. The O*NET summary report 
for this occupation does not establish the duties of the Petitioner's particular position would normally 
require a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
The Petitioner submitted an opinion letter authored b a Professor and Chair of 
Computer Science at the University~-----~ In his letter, the professor (1) described the 
credentials that he asserts qualify him to opine upon the nature of the proffered position; (2) described 
aspects of the job duties proposed for the Beneficiary; and (3) stated that the "knowledge required to 
successfully undertake these operations is taught in Bachelor-level programs in Computer Science and 
related areas." We carefully evaluated the professor's assertions in support of the instant petition but 
find them insufficient. 
The professor repeats the position's duties in the Petitioner's RFE response and lists 18 "knowledge 
areas" from the 2013 Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Programs in Computer Science, 
published by the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM).10 These guidelines for potential 
curriculums are far too broad to establish that a particular position requires a body of highly specialized 
4 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Data for Occupations Not Covered in 
Detail, https://www.bls.gov/ooh/about/data-for-occupations-not-covered-in-detail.htm (last visited Aug. 12, 2020). 
5 The Handbook also indicates that this occupation does not require work experience in a related occupation or typical 
on-the-job training. Id. 
6 See https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/15-1199.09 (last visited Aug. 12, 2020). 
7 See id. 
8 For additional information, see the O*NET Online Help webpage available at http://www.onetonline.org/help/online/svp. 
9 The O*NET summary report indicates that 38 percent of the respondents had a bachelor's degree, 24 percent an 
associate's degree, and 19 percent a post-baccalaureate certificate. The wide variance in the type of degree, within the 
same year, undermines any reliance on these types of surveys to establish a normal minimum requirement of even a general 
bachelor's degree. See https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/15-1199.09 (last visited Aug. 12, 2020). 
10 This document or pertinent excerpts were not provided for the record for our review. 
4 
knowledge that is attained through study at a bachelor-level degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. The professor also states "[i]n my opinion, any of the duties listed for the position could be 
matched to a corresponding knowledge area, suggesting a high degree of competence necessary to 
perform them" and that "if any of the job duties require competence in a major knowledge area, it stands 
to reason that the whole of the job's responsibilities could not be performed satisfactorily without 
Bachelor-level competence in Computer Science or a related technical field." The professor concludes 
further that because "there is significant overlap between the prescribed duties for the position, and the 
general knowledge areas covered in Bachelor-level Computer Science programs, ... any individual 
lacking a Bachelor's degree (or its equivalent) in these fields would not be able to perform these duties to 
the degree [the Petitioner] requires for the continuous execution of its business operations." The 
professor, however, does not offer a cogent analysis of why matching any of the duties of the particular 
position to the broadly described corresponding knowledge areas for a potential curriculum is the same 
as establishing that the duties require a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. Other 
than referring to the "wide adoption of the ACM's Curriculum Guidelines," he does not discuss their 
relevance in establishing that the particular position offered here requires a specific bachelor's degree. 
Moreover, he does not discuss other relevant research, studies, or authoritative publications he utilized 
as part of his review and foundation for his opinion. 
The professor also contends that "[b]ecause of the comp I icated nature of the products and services [the 
Petitioner] provides, ... their development requires expert level knowledge in the relevant fields." In 
contrast, the Petitioner stated that "the beneficiary performs his duties under the close supervision and 
guidance of his superiors - he is not exercising his independent judgment in determining the methods 
by which to carry out his duties." The professor's assertion that the Petitioner's services require 
expert-level knowledge does not appear consistent with the Petitioner's characterization of the 
proffered position. Given his lack of understanding of the level of responsibilities of the proffered 
position, it is not clear if the professor had sufficient information to determine the requirements of the 
position. He does not demonstrate in-depth knowledge of the Petitioner's operations or how the duties 
of the position would actually be performed in the context of its business enterprise. While we 
appreciate the professor's discussion of duties provided by the Petitioner, his analysis falls short of 
providing a meaningful discussion of what the Beneficiary will actually do in the proffered position 
and how those duties require the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge. As a result, we conclude that the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the professor 
possessed the requisite information to adequately assess the nature of the position and appropriately 
determine the educational requirements of the position, based upon the job duties and level of 
responsibilities. The omission of a discussion or acknowledgement of this aspect of the duties 
diminishes the evidentiary value of this opinion as it does not appear to be based on a complete 
understanding of the proffered position. 
Moreover, the professor states that "a Bachelor's degree in Computer Science and related technical 
fields such as Business Administration is an industry-standard requirement for positions relating to 
the design, construction, implementation, maintenance, and operation of computer software systems, 
such as the Project Manager position discussed herein" (emphasis omitted). The requirement of a 
bachelor's degree in business administration is inadequate to establish that a position qualifies as a 
specialty occupation. 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, 
5 
without further specification, does not establish the position as a specialty occupation. Cf. Matter of 
Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 l&N Dec. 558, 560 (Comm'r 1988). 
In summary, and for each and all the reasons discussed above, we conclude that the opinion letter 
rendered by I lis not sufficient to establish the proffered position as a specialty occupation. 
The conclusion reached byl I lacks the requisite specificity and detail and is not supported by 
independent, objective evidence demonstrating the manner in which he reached such conclusion. 
There is an inadequate factual foundation established to support the opinion and the opinion is not in 
accord with other information in the record. Therefore, the letter froml ldoes not establish 
that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. 
We may, in our discretion, use advisory opinion statements submitted as expert testimony. However, 
where an opinion is not in accord with other information or is in any way questionable, we are not 
required to accept or may give less weight to that evidence. Matter of Caron International, 19 l&N 
Dec. 791 (Comm'r 1988). As a reasonable exercise of our discretion, we discount the advisory opinion 
letter as not probative of any criterion of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
The record lacks sufficient evidence to support a finding that the proffered position is one for which a 
baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry. For the aforementioned reasons, 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. Thus, 
the Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(1). 
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 contemplates 
common industry practice, while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the Petitioner's specific 
position. The Petitioner does not assert, nor does the record demonstrate, eligibility under either prong 
of this criterion. Accordingly, we will not address this criterion. However, because the Petitioner 
asserts eligibility under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4), we incorporate by reference our discussion 
and analysis on this matter in the fourth criterion into the second prong of this criterion. 
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 
does not assert, nor does the record demonstrate, eligibility under this criterion. 
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 
6 
usually associated with the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. 
In support of its assertion that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation, the Petitioner 
described the proffered position and its business operations. However, the Petitioner has not 
sufficiently developed relative complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the proffered position. In 
other words, the Petitioner has not demonstrated how the duties of the proffered position require the 
theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge such that a bachelor's 
or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is required to perform them. 
The proffered duties suggest that the Beneficiary will be interacting with "various functional teams" 
in performance of his duties. The Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary will be "setting expectations 
for deliverables from team members, appropriating the project workload to the team based on 
individual expertise" and "receiving feedback ... from Technical leads and Practice leads." However, 
the record does not contain sufficient information regarding a specific project on which the Beneficiary 
will work. Although the Petitioner submitted an organizational chart, it did not provide a detailed 
information regarding a project demonstrating the various teams and positions assigned to it. 
Therefore, the extent of the Beneficiary's duties cannot be determined. The evidence does not show 
the operational structure within the Petitioner's project in a manner that would establish the 
Beneficiary's relative role therein. The Petitioner has not adequately evidenced the scope of the 
Beneficiary's responsibilities within the context of a particular project. 
Moreover, the modified duties submitted in the RFE response appear inconsistent with the Petitioner's 
characterization of the Beneficiary's overall responsibilities. For example, the Petitioner stated that 
the duties require "expert judgement approaches to project planning," and that the Beneficiary will 
"oversee and approve database design, implementation and changes" as well as "reviewing workload 
of team members, inspecting their work, and providing feedback to help improve performance." The 
Petitioner also stated that the Beneficiary will "oversee acquisition of resources, talent, and materials 
as needed." However, the Petitioner has only assigned the position a Level I wage on the LCA 
indicating that the proffered position is an entry-level position.11 The Petitioner further stated that 
"the beneficiary performs his duties under the close supervision and guidance of his superiors - he is 
not exercising his independent judgment in determining the methods by which to carry out his duties." 
The Petitioner did not provide any explanation regarding the incongruency between the modified 
duties requiring expert judgement in planning and its characterization of the position as an entry-level 
position requiring close supervision and guidance. 
Moreover, the record does not contain a sufficiently detailed description of the Beneficiary's duties to 
establish that the position 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, 
or its equivalent. For example, the Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary's duties include "[d]efin[ing] 
roles and responsibilities for the team members, and formaliz[ing] each Individual Contributor's 
duties." However, the general description of the duties does not illuminate the substantive application 
of knowledge involved or any particular educational requirement associated with defining roles or 
11 DOL, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs 
(rev. Nov. 2009), available at http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/NPWHC_Guidance_Revised_11_2009.pdf 
7 
formalizing duties. Moreover, the Petitioner did not elaborate on who the team members are or what 
formalizing duties entails and how the Beneficiary would accomplish that. The Petitioner further 
stated that the Beneficiary will "[b]uild strategic relationships with key decision makers in the client 
firm, and third-party vendors, contractors and customers." While the Petitioner stated that the 
Beneficiary's "coursework in Web Technology and Software Engineering help him perform this task 
efficiently," it did not explain why these duties would require a bachelor's degree, or the equivalent, 
in a specific specialty. Although the Petitioner suggests that certain computer science related courses 
may be beneficial in performing various duties of the position, we disagree with its inference that such 
a degree is required in order to perform the duties of the proffered position. In other words, the 
Petitioner's suggestion that a person with a bachelor's degree in computer science could perform the 
duties of the proffered position is not the same as stating that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty 
is required to perform those duties. As such, the Petitioner misconstrues the statutory and regulatory 
requirements of a specialty occupation. 
Further, 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. Specifically, as noted above, the requirement of a 
bachelor's degree in business administration is inadequate to establish that a position qualifies as a 
specialty occupation. A petitioner must demonstrate that the proffered position requires a precise and 
specific course of study that relates directly to the position in question. 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 l&N Dec. at 560. To 
prove that a job requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge as required by section 214(i)(1) of the Act, a petitioner must establish that the position 
requires the attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specialized field of study or its 
equivalent. As explained above, we interpret 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. We have 
consistently stated that, 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 conclusion that a particular position qualifies for classification as a 
specialty occupation. Royal Siam Corp., 484 F.3d at 147. 
The Petitioner repeatedly claims that the Beneficiary is well qualified for the position and references 
his 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. We are required to follow long-standing 
legal standards and determine first, whether the proffered position qualifies for classification as a 
specialty occupation, and second, whether the Beneficiary was qualified for the position at the time 
the nonimmigrant visa petition was filed. Cf. Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 l&N Dec. at 560 
("The facts of a beneficiary's background only come at issue after it is found that the position in which 
the petitioner intends to employ him falls within [a specialty occupation]."). 
The Petitioner did not sufficiently develop relative complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the 
position. Accordingly, the Petitioner has not satisfied the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h )( 4)(i i i)(A)( 4). 
8 
Consequently, the Petitioner has not satisfied any of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
9