dismissed H-1B Case: Information Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 5644768 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : FEB. 27, 2020 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary under the H-lB nonimrnigrant 
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-lB 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. On appeal, 
the Petitioner provides a brief and additional evidence, and asserts that the Director erred in denying 
the petition. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 1 
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. 
1 We follow the preponderance of the evidence standard. Matter ofChawathe , 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010) . 
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 offered 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. Chertojf, 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"). 
II. ANALYSIS 
For the reasons set out below, we determine that the proffered position does not qualify as a specialty 
occupation. Specifically, the record provides insufficient information regarding the proffered position, 
which in tum precludes us from understanding the position's substantive nature and the determination 
of whether the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 2 
A crucial aspect of this matter is whether the Petitioner has sufficiently described the duties of the 
proffered position such that we may discern the nature of the position and whether the position actually 
requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of a highly specialized knowledge attained 
through at least a baccalaureate degree in a specific discipline. When determining whether a position 
is a specialty occupation, we look at the nature of the business offering the employment and the 
description of the specific duties of the position as it relates to the performance of those duties within 
the context of that particular employer's business operations. The Petitioner has not provided this 
evidence. 
2 The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H-1 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. 
2 
The Petitioner, founded in 2008, employs 18 staff-members, and is "focused on master data 
management, data warehousing, business intelligence, and commercial sales operations" services for 
firms within the life sciences industry. On the labor condition application (LCA)3 submitted in support 
of the H-1 B petition, the Petitioner designated the proffered position under the occupational category 
"Network and Computer Systems Administrators" corresponding to the Standard Occupational 
Classification (SOC) code 15-1142 with a Level 1 wage. 4 It seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a 
"systems engineer" at its office location inl I California. 5 
The Petitioner initially provided a list often bulleted job duties which it quoted verbatim from DOL's 
Occupational Information Network (O*NET) summary report for "Network and Computer Systems 
Administrators." 6 In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner submitted 
an updated job description for the proffered position which included the ten job duties that the 
Petitioner previously quoted directly from the O*NET summary report, along with the percentage of 
time that the Beneficiary will devote to each job duty, as follows: 7 
1. Maintain and administer computer networks and related computing 
environments including computer hardware, systems software, applications 
software, and all configurations. (15%) 
2. Diagnose, troubleshoot, and resolve hardware, software, or other network and 
system problems, and replace defective components when necessary. (15%) 
3. Plan, coordinate, and implement network security measures to protect data, 
software, and hardware. (15%) 
4. Design, configure, and test computer hardware, networking software and 
operating system software, to determine whether adjustments need to be made, 
and to determine where changes will need to be made in the future. (15%) 
5. Confer with network users about how to solve existing system problems. 
Gather data pertaining to customer needs, and use the information to identify, 
predict, interpret, and evaluate system and network requirements. (15%) 
6. Recommend changes to improve systems and network configurations, and 
determine hardware or software requirements related to such changes. 
Coordinate with vendors and with company personnel to facilitate purchases. 
(15%) 
3 The Petitioner is required to submit a certified LCA to demonstrate that it will pay an H-1 B worker the higher of either 
the prevailing wage for the occupational classification in the "area of employment" or the actual wage paid by the employer 
to other employees with similar experience and qualifications who are performing the same services. Section 212(n)(l) 
of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 655.731(a). 
4 The Petitioner classified the proffered position at a Level I wage (the lowest of four assignable wage levels). A 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. 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. U.S. Dep't of 
Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs 
(rev. Nov. 2009), available at http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdti'NPWHC Guidance_ Revised_ I I_ 2009 .pdf 
5 Notably, according to Internet sources the Petitioner's office location inl J California is a four-bedroom 
residence. See https://www.redfin.com/CAI , ./home/5097897. 
6 The O*NET Summary Report for "Network and Computer Systems Administrators," may be viewed at 
https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/15-1142 (last visited Feb. 26, 2020). 
7 As presented by the Petitioner, the job duties numbered 4 - 6 above each combined, in whole or in part, the verbatim text 
of two O*NET summary job report job duties. 
3 
7. Research new technologies by attending seminars, reading trade articles, or 
taking classes, and implement or recommend the implementation of new 
technologies. (10%) 
When discussing H-lB employment, the Petitioner's job description must be comprehensive enough 
to properly ascertain the minimum educational requirements necessary to perform those duties. We 
conclude that the Petitioner's reliance on the O*NET summary report, which provides general 
information about the occupation, as the basis to establish the substantive nature of the duties of the 
proffered position is misplaced. While the O*NET summary report's job duty listing identifies 
generic job tasks that are typically performed by individuals working within the "Network and 
Computer Systems Administrators" occupational category, they do not give context to the specific 
tasks that the Beneficiary will perform within the Petitioner's business operations. Here, the 
Petitioner does not provide sufficient detail regarding the work these duties will entail, and how these 
tasks merit recognition of the proffered position as a specialty occupation. 
We also observe that the Petitioner-stated server maintenance and systems support duties, such as the 
"troubleshoot and offer hands-on support," "create and keep [technical] documentation," and "monitor 
network performance" duties of the position could also be performed by a computer network support 
specialist or a similar support role. 8 These aspects of the proffered position suggest that the proffered 
position may be a computer network support specialist role rather than a network and computer 
systems administrator position. Therefore, we are unable to determine complexity and specialization 
of the proffered position in relation to the other positions involved in the Petitioner's data infrastructure 
operations. 
In summary, the Petitioner's pos1t10n descriptions do not provide the information necessary to 
determine the actual tasks performed and if the tasks are low-level tasks, tasks that may require a 
postsecondary technical certificate or an associate's degree, or tasks that actually require a bachelor's 
level of knowledge in a specific specialty to perform the work. 9 Such general descriptions do not 
illuminate the substantive application of knowledge involved or any particular educational 
requirement associated with such duties. Generalized descriptions of the duties do not establish a 
necessary correlation between the proffered position and a need for a particular level of education, or 
its equivalency, in a body of highly specialized knowledge in a specific specialty. 
8 For instance, the Handbook states that computer network support specialists "play an important role in the routine 
maintenance of their organization's networks," "may assist computer users through phone, email, or in-person visits," and 
often work under network and computer systems administrators who handle more complex issues. Bureau of Labor 
Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. Occupational Outlook Handbook, Computer Support Specialists, on the internet at 
https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/print/computer-support-specialists.htm (last visited Feb. 
26, 2020). 
9 For example, the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) states that some employers 
may require only a postsecondary certificate or an associate' s degree for a network and computer systems administrator 
position. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Network and Computer 
Systems Administrators, on the Internet at https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/print/network­
and-computer-systems-administrators.htm (last visited Feb. 26, 2020). 
4 
On a fundamental level, the Petitioner has also not provided consistent and adequate evidence to 
establish the scope and magnitude of the proffered position's role and responsibilities within the 
Petitioner's data infrastructure projects and initiatives that the Beneficiary will be assigned to during 
the course of his proposed H-lB employment. 10 Again, the Petitioner is engaged in providing "data 
management, data warehousing, business intelligence, and commercial sales operations" services for 
its customers. It submitted general material about its information technology consulting services and 
copies of reports and policies relating to its information technology consulting business, 11 but did not 
identify or discuss the specific data infrastructure projects or initiatives which require the 
Beneficiary's services. Rather, it initially described the position's role and responsibilities, as 
follows: 
[The Beneficiary] will be responsible for overseeing data center operations, and 
security using his knowledge of data center operations, infrastructure design and 
management. He will troubleshoot and offer hands-on support to make sure the data 
center keeps a high uptime. He will also be in charge of data infrastructure management 
and other software tools, and will make recommendations for equipment and procedure 
changes to decrease costs and increase efficiency. He will create and keep 
documentation and processes up to date so successful server and system deployments 
are repeatable. 
[The Beneficiary] will also plan, 1mtiate, and manage data center projects for the 
company. He will lead and guide the work of technical staff and serve as liaison 
between business and technical aspects of projects. In addition, he will also plan data 
project stages and assess business implications for each stage as well as monitor 
progress to assure deadlines, standards, and cost targets are met. 
The Director requested evidence in her RFE, to include an explanation of how the Beneficiary's 
specific job duties relate to the Petitioner's products and services, as well as organization charts and 
other material that would delineate the Petitioner's divisional organization, and staffing hierarchy. 
However, the Petitioner did not sufficiently address this aspect. 12 In response to the Director's RFE, 
the Petitioner provides a January 2019 which reiterates the above narrative, asserting that the 
Beneficiary's "position and duties will be closely supervised by his direct supervisor, [], who holds 
the position of [ d]irector, [ n ]etwork [ e ]ngineering," and that the Beneficiary "will be an important 
element in our MDM and Infrastructure department." 13 
10 We must review the actual duties the Beneficiary will be expected to perform to asce1iain whether those duties require 
at least a baccalaureate degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, as required for classification as a specialty 
occupation. To accomplish that task in this matter, we review the duties in conjunction with the specific project(s) or 
initiatives to which the Beneficiary will be assigned. To allow otherwise, results in generic descriptions of duties that, 
while they may appear (in some instances) to comprise the duties of a specialty occupation, are not related to any actual 
services the Beneficiary is expected to provide. 
11 For instance, it submitted a copy of its master services agreement template for use with clients, security vulnerability 
reports, and the organizations standards for the creation of passwords for its clients, employees, contractors, and vendors. 
12 "Failure to submit requested evidence which precludes a material line of inquiry shall be grounds for denying the 
[petition]." 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(14). 
13 The Petitioner furnishes another copy of the January 2019 letter on appeal. 
5 
The Petitioner's organization chart encompasses at least 22 positions, and notes that the Beneficiary's 
position is "proposed, pending fonding." The staffing for the MDM and Infrastructure department is 
comprised of the Beneficiary's proposed position, his supervisor's position as the director of network 
engineering, and a director of technology. The operations & information technology department in 
the organization chart also includes positions bearing senior, executive, or managerial information 
technology job titles that appear to be relevant to the proffered position, such as "senior data 
warehousing consultant," "director of information," "data warehousing vice president," and "manager 
- development & data management." 
Here, the Petitioner has not sufficiently established that the Beneficiary in his "systems engineer" role, 
(which the Petitioner designated as appropriate for the Level I wage within the LCA 14), will be charged 
with "data infrastructure management," such that he will "plan, initiate, and manage data center 
projects," "lead and guide the work of technical staff," and "serve as liaison between business and 
technical aspects of projects," within the Petitioner's organizational cohort, which is replete with 
positions bearing position titles which suggest that the incumbents, not the Beneficiary, will be 
charged with such responsibilities. The Petitioner must resolve these inconsistencies with 
independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-
92 (BIA 1988). 
Considering the record in its entirety, we conclude that the Petitioner did not provide sufficient 
evidence of (1) its organizational hierarchy, or other material to illustrate the Beneficiary's asserted 
placement within the actual division, teams, or working groups to which he will be assigned; or (2) 
the specific data infrastructure projects or initiatives that are underway at the Petitioner's office 
location that require his services, to substantiate the scope and nature of the Beneficiary's role as a 
systems engineer within the context of the Petitioner's business operation. 
The Petitioner also relies on the opinion letter written bj !Associate Professor at 
I I university, to support its assertion that the pro Tered position reqmres at least a bachelor's 
degree in computer science, systems engineering, MIS, CIS, or a related field. We carefully evaluated 
the professor's assertions in support of the instant petition but find them insufficient. First, the 
professor opines "[ u ]pon reviewing the duties generally performed by Network and Computer Systems 
Administrators according to O*NET, it is apparent the Systems Engineer for [the Petitioner] shares 
many of the same duties and falls under this occupational category." However, the professor does not 
acknowledge that in fact all of the duties provided by the Petitioner were quoted verbatim from the 
O*N et summary report for this occupational category. We incorporate our previous discussion and 
determination that the Petitioner's use of O*NET job duties is insufficient to establish the substantive 
nature of the duties of the proffered position. 
14 On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that wage level I does not preclude a proffered position from classification as a specialty 
occupation and cites to our nonprecedent decisions. We agree that the wage level designation may be a relevant factor but 
is not itself conclusive evidence that a proffered position meets the requirements of section 2 l 4(i)(l) of the Act. 
6 
The professor also asserts that the described duties "are not those of a lower-level employee 
performing tasks such as those performed by a Technologist or an IT-support employee, but rather 
those of a professional employee with a strong background in computer science concepts and 
principles and a great level of responsibility within the company." He further opines that "duties such 
as monitoring network performance could only be performed competently by a candidate with at least 
a [b ]achelor's degree [in the aforementioned programs of study]," but does not specify the source of 
the information that he relied upon to reach his conclusion. 
We observe again that duties such as "monitoring network performance" are also typical tasks 
performed by "Computer Network Support Specialists," which in similar fashion to the Handbook's 
"Network and Computer Systems Administrators" chapter, the Handbook states that a bachelor's 
degree is required for some computer support specialist positions, but an associate' s degree or 
postsecondary classes may be enough for others. 15 While we acknowledge that the professor may 
have relied upon information about the position and the Petitioner's business operation that were not 
submitted in support of the petition, given the generic and inconsistent evidence presented in the record 
which we have previously discussed, the professor's statements raise questions regarding his claimed 
familiarity with the Petitioner's company, as well as the proffered position. Therefore, the professor's 
opinion letter does not substantiate his conclusions, such that the Petitioner has met its burden of proof. 
Further, the professor asserts that "the industry standard for a position such as Systems Engineer for 
[ the Petitioner] is to be filled through recruiting a college graduate with [ one of the aforementioned 
bachelor degrees], or a related area, or the equivalent." He also provides a discussion of the typical 
coursework involved in obtaining a typical bachelor's degree in these fields. While we recognize that 
the professor may be attempting to demonstrate how an established curriculum of courses leading to 
a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty is required to perform the duties of the proffered position, 
we cannot agree with his analysis. Here, the professor confuses the ability of a degreed information 
technology person to perform the duties of the proffered position with a degree requirement in order 
to perform the duties. While the professor may draw inferences that information technology related 
courses may be beneficial in performing certain duties of the position, we disagree with his inference 
that such a degree is required in order to perform the duties of the proffered position. Put simply, 
stating for instance 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 such a degree is required to perform those 
duties. As such, the professor's analysis misconstrues the statutory and regulatory requirements of a 
specialty occupation. 
We may, in our discretion, use opinion statements submitted by the Petitioner as advisory. Matter of 
Caron Int 'l, Inc., 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r 1988). 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. Id. For the sake of brevity, we will not address other deficiencies within the 
professor's analyses of the proffered position. 
15 See https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/print/computer-support-specialists.htm (last visited 
Feb. 26, 2020). 
7 
In summary, the Petitioner asserts that the described duties fall within the occupational classification 
of the network and computer systems administrator occupation and that this position requires at least 
a bachelor's degree in computer science, systems engineering, MIS, CIS, or a related field. However, 
without a more complete position description and specific information detailing what role the 
Petitioner expects the Beneficiary to play within its organization, we cannot conclude that the 
Beneficiary's actual position and overall level of responsibility require 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. 
Without probative evidence detailing the work the Beneficiary will perform, as well as evidence 
establishing that the work requires a bachelor's degree in a specific discipline, or its equivalent, the 
Petitioner has not established that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 16 In other 
words, without demonstrating the substantive nature and requirements of the position, the Petitioner 
has not shown that the proffered position satisfies any criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), 
because it is the substantive nature of that work that determines: (1) the normal minimum educational 
requirement for the particular position, which is the focus of criterion 1; (2) industry positions which 
are parallel to the proffered position and thus appropriate for review for a common degree requirement, 
under the first alternate prong of criterion 2; (3) the level of complexity or uniqueness of the proffered 
position, which is the focus of the second alternate prong of criterion 2; ( 4) the factual justification for 
a petitioner normally requiring a degree or its equivalent, when that is an issue under criterion 3; and 
( 5) the degree of specialization and complexity of the specific duties, which is the focus of criterion 4. 
As the Petitioner has not established that it satisfies any of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A), 
it has not established that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 17 
III. CONCLUSION 
In visa petition proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration 
benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. The Petitioner has not met that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
16 Tt is the Petitioner's burden to prove by a preponderance of evidence that it is qualified for the benefit sought. Matter of 
Chawathe, 25 T&N Dec. at 376. In evaluating the evidence, eligibility is to be determined not by the quantity of evidence 
alone but by its quality. Id. 
17 As the lack of probative evidence in the record precludes a conclusion that the proffered position is a specialty occupation 
and is dispositive of the appeal, we will not further discuss the Petitioner's assertions on appeal regarding the criteria under 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
8