dismissed H-1B Case: Information Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 8770898 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : MAY 29, 2020 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a "devops support and systems 
administrator" under the H-lB 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-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 Vermont Service Center Director denied the petition, concluding that the record did not establish 
that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. 
The petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence .1 
The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) reviews the questions in this matter de nova. 2 Upon de 
nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
Section 10l(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b) of the Act defines an H-lB nonimmigrant as a foreign national "who is 
coming temporarily to the United States to perform services ... in a specialty occupation described in 
section 214(i)(l) ... "(emphasis added) . Section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § l 184(i)(l), defines 
the term "specialty occupation" as an occupation that requires "theoretical and practical application of 
a body of highly specialized knowledge, and 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 section 214(i)(l) of the Act but adds a 
non-exhaustive list of fields of endeavor. In addition, 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) provides that the 
1 Section 291 of the Act; Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). 
2 See Matter of Christo 's Inc ., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015) . 
proffered position must also meet one of the following criteria to qualify as a specialty occupation 
position: 
( I) 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). As this regulation must be read with the statutory and regulatory 
definitions of a specialty occupation under section 214(i)(l) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii), 
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 
13 9, 14 7 (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 
Upon review of the record in its totality and for the reasons set out below, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 3 Specifically, the record 
does not establish that the job duties require an educational background, or its equivalent, 
commensurate with a specialty occupation. 
A. First Criterion 
The criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(]), 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 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. 4 
3 On appeal the Petitioner challenges the Director's decision on the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 2 l 4.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A)(l) and ( 4). 
The Petitioner does not address the Director's assessment and decision on the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) 
and (3). Accordingly, we will limit our analysis of the evidence as it relates to the first and fourth criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) and the statutory and regulatory definitions, section 214(i)(l) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). 
4 We do not maintain that the Handbook is the exclusive source of relevant information. That is, the occupational category 
designated by the Petitioner is considered 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 
2 
On the certified labor condition application (LCA), 5 the Petitioner designated the proposed position 
as a Standard Occupation Classification (SOC) code 15-1142 "Network and Computer Systems 
Administrators" occupation at a Level II wage. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Handbook 
reports that "[ m Jost employers require network and computer systems administrators to have a 
bachelor's degree in a field related to computer or information science" 6 and thus this occupation is a 
specialty occupation. However, the Handbook recognizes in the next sentence that "[ o ]thers may 
require only a postsecondary certificate or an associate's degree." 7 Thus, the Handbook identifies a 
range of methods to enter the occupation, from a postsecondary certificate to an associate's degree to 
a bachelor's degree in a field related to computer or information science. It is the imprecise and varied 
information in the Handbook regarding the ways to enter this occupation that precludes a conclusion 
that there is categorically a normal minimum educational requirement for entry into the occupation. 
The Petitioner cites Next Generation Tech., Inc. v. Johnson, 328 F. Supp. 3d 252,267 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) 
to support its argument that the Handbook establishes the "Network and Computer Systems 
Administrators" occupation is a specialty occupation. However, as recognized by another court, while 
the Handbook may establish the first regulatory criterion for certain professions, many occupations 
are not described in such a categorical manner. 8 See Innova Sols., Inc. v. Baran, 2019 WL 3753334, 
at *8 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2019) (declining to follow Next Generation Tech., Inc.). For example, "[the 
Handbook's] description for the Computer Programmer occupation does not describe the normal 
minimum educational requirements of the occupation in a categorical fashion." Id.; see also Xiao tong 
Liu v. Baran, 2018 WL 7348851 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2018). "Accordingly, [the Petitioner] could not 
simply rely on [the Handbook] profile, and instead had the burden to show that the particular position 
offered to [the Beneficiary] was among the Computer Programmer positions for which a bachelor's 
degree was normally required." See Innova Sols., Inc. 2019 WL 3753334, at *8. Here, the Handbook 
does not describe the normal minimum educational requirement for the occupation in a categorical 
manner since some employers accept less than a bachelor's degree. As will be discussed, the 
Petitioner also has not established that its particular position is among the "Network and Computer 
Systems Administrators" for which a bachelor's degree in a specific discipline, or its equivalent, is 
normally required. 
The Petitioner also cites to Residential Finance Corp. v. USCIS, 839 F. Supp. 2d 985 (S.D. Ohio 2012), 
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 
occupations that it addresses. Nevertheless, to satisfy the first criterion, 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 A petitioner is required to submit an LCA to the Department of Labor 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 duties, experience, and qualifications. Section 212(n)(l) of the Act; 
20 C.F.R. § 655.73l(a). 
6 See Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Network and Computer Systems 
Administrators, https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/network-and-computer-systems­
administrators.htm (last visited May 22, 2020). 
7 Id. 
8 Such professions would include surgeons or attorneys, which indisputably require at least a bachelor's degree for entry 
into the occupation. 
3 
specialized knowledge and a prospective employee who has attained the credentialing indicating 
possession of that knowledge." We agree that "[t]he knowledge and not the title of the degree is what 
is important." However, the record must not only demonstrate that an occupation requires the 
theoretical and practical application of a body of specialized knowledge but must also establish that 
the position requires the attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specialized field of study or 
its equivalent. Section 214(i)(l) of the Act. Here, the Handbook does not establish that the "Network 
and Computer Systems Administrators" occupation categorically requires 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. Stated another way, some employers require only a postsecondary certificate or an 
associate's degree to enter the occupation. 9 
Moreover, the Petitioner has not established that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for entry into its particular position. Although the 
Petitioner claims a number of the listed tasks require knowledge of programming languages, storage 
platforms, network concepts and DevOps tools, there is insufficient probative detail to conclude that 
the duties require a body of highly specialized knowledge that is attained through bachelor's-level 
study in a specific discipline, or its equivalent. Again, the Petitioner has the burden to demonstrate 
that the particular position offered to the Beneficiary is among the "Network and Computer Systems 
Administrators" or other technology occupations for which a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, 
or its equivalent, is normally required. The Petitioner has not established this component of the 
specialty occupation requirements. 
B. 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. 
On appeal, the Petitioner refers to its unique products within the industry that go beyond the traditional 
warehouse model and enables a new data architecture that allows self-service, on-demand access to 
analytics-ready data drawn from all relevant sources at massive speed and scale. We have reviewed the 
information provided regarding the Petitioner's product. Although the Petitioner may market its 
particular product as unique among other similar products, the Petitioner has not established how the work 
associated with administering the product is complex, specialized, or unique. 
The Petitioner also asserts that the duties of the Beneficiary's position are complex because the position 
is multifaceted. The Petitioner states that: 
[The Beneficiary] will perform traditional IT duties, such as protecting the Company's 
employees from phishing scams, identity theft, spam emails, and virus attacks; but beyond 
these duties he is responsible for ensuring the security of vast amounts of customer data 
stored on various platforms and being processed and analyzed in multiple ways. Finally, 
9 Supra DOL Handbook at https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/network-and-computer­
systems-administrators.htm (last visited May 22, 2020). 
4 
he is also a software developer, working with colleagues and customers to improve the 
Company's products and apply them appropriately to customers' unique situations. 
We have reviewed the Petitioner's list of duties and allocation of the time required to perform the duties. 
However, it is not clear how much time, if any, the Beneficiary will be required to develop software 
systems or applications. For example, the Petitioner indicates that the Beneficiary will advise developers, 
design solutions for developers, develop and write scripts and code, organize troubleshooting sessions 
with developers to fix issues, and consult with customers about software system design, cloud 
architecture, and maintenance of end-to-end solutions. These duties are not sufficiently detailed to 
conclude that the Beneficiary will perform systems or applications software development. Moreover, if 
the proffered position is multifaceted, as the Petitioner claims, and does "involve[] software development 
duties in addition to the typical duties of the position ( emphasis in original)," the Petitioner has not 
designated the proper occupational code on the certified LCA. If the proffered position includes a 
combination of two different, but related occupations, the Petitioner must select the higher-paying SOC 
code occupation for the certified LCA. 10 The occupations of "Software Developers, Applications" SOC 
code 15-1132 and "Software Developers, Systems Software" SOC code 15-1133, both require a higher 
paying wage. 11 Thus the certified LCA would not support the H-lB petition which would also preclude 
approval of the petition. 
Similarly, the Petitioner's indication that the Beneficiary is responsible for ensuring the security of data 
is not sufficiently delineated in the record. We also note that the occupation of "Information Security 
Analysts" SOC code 15-1122, also requires a higher paying wage than the occupation designated on the 
certified LCA. 12 Although the Petitioner has provided a lengthy narrative of the proposed duties, the 
description is insufficient to convey an understanding of the Beneficiary's proposed role and level of 
responsibility within the Petitioner's organization. Further, the Petitioner's assertion, on appeal, that the 
proposed position is multifaceted and thus should be considered complex is at odds with the occupation 
and wage level designated on the certified LCA. 13 
10 See 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/pdt!NPWHC _Guidance_ Revised_ 11 _ 2009 .pdf 
11 The Foreign Labor Certification Data Center Online Wage Library shows that a wage Level TT "Software Developers, 
Applications" occupation requires an annual wage of $84,698 and a wage Level TT "Software Developers, Systems 
Software" occupation requires an annual wage of $97,178, for the time period and location of the proposed position. See 
https://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?code=l5-l l32&areaDyear=l9&source=l and 
https://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?code= 15-l 133&area yq1.1:=J...94source= 1, respectively. 
12 Id. at https://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?code= 15-l 122&area=~year= 19&source= 1. 
13 The LCA serves as the critical mechanism for enforcing section 212(n)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § l 182(n)(l). See Labor 
Condition Applications and Requirements for Employers Using Nonimmigrants on H-IB Visas in Specialty Occupations 
and as Fashion Models; Labor Certification Process for Permanent Employment of Aliens in the United States, 65 Fed. 
Reg. 80,110, 80, 110-11 (proposed Dec. 20, 2000) (to be codified at 20 C.F.R. pts. 655-56) (indicating that the wage 
protections in the Act seek "to protect U.S. workers' wages and eliminate any economic incentive or advantage in hiring 
temporary foreign workers" and that this "process of protecting U.S. workers begins with [the filing of an LCA] with 
[DOL]."). While DOL is the agency that certifies LCA applications before they are submitted USCTS, DOL regulations 
note that the Department of Homeland Security (OHS) (i.e., its immigration benefits branch, USCTS) is the department 
responsible for determining whether the content of an LCA filed for a paiiicular F01m 1-129 actually supports that 
petition. See 20 C.F.R. § 655.705(b). The regulation at 20 C.F.R. § 655.705(b) requires that USCIS ensure that "the 
petition is supported by an LCA which corresponds with the petition .... " 
5 
We have also considered the Petitioner's contention that its description is sufficiently detailed due to the 
extensive list of technologies, tools, languages, and programs the individual in the proposed position will 
use. We note that the Petitioner lists the technologies, tools, languages, programs, following each 
category of duties but does not offer an analysis and meaningful explanation of why the listed duties 
require a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, rather than an associate's degree or 
experience and certifications in the third-party technology that will be used to perform the duties. We 
also reviewed the list of courses the Petitioner asserts provides knowledge of each of the technologies, 
tools, languages, and programs. We do not disagree that an individual may take one, two, or several 
courses and gain sufficient knowledge to perform the duties of the proposed position, but the Petitioner 
has not demonstrated how an established curriculum of courses leading to a baccalaureate or higher 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is required to perform the duties of the proffered position. 
Put simply, stating that a person with a bachelor's or master's degree in computer science could perform 
the duties of the proffered position is not the same as establishing that such a degree is required to perform 
those duties. 
Upon review, the record lacks sufficiently detailed information to distinguish the proffered position as 
more specialized and 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. The "Network and Computer 
Systems Administrators" occupation encompasses a broad base of responsibilities and duties and the 
required education and experience to adequately perform these duties also varies. However, if an 
individual with an associate' s degree or a general bachelor's degree may enter the occupation, as 
described in the Handbook, the Petitioner must offer some evidence distinguishing its particular 
position from such positions within this occupation. 14 The Petitioner's choice of a level II wage does 
not assist but rather hinders a conclusion that the Petitioner's particular position is distinguishable from 
those positions that do not require a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent.15 In other 
words, if typical positions located within the occupational category do not require a bachelor's degree in 
a specific specialty, or the equivalent, then it is unclear how a position with Level II characteristics would, 
regardless of the Petitioner's assertions. The record lacks sufficiently detailed and unambiguous 
information to distinguish the proffered position as unique from or more specialized and complex than 
other closely related positions that can be performed by persons without at least a bachelor's degree 
in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
Upon review of the totality of the evidence submitted, the Petitioner has not established that more likely 
than not, the proffered position is a specialty occupation under any of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). Moreover, the record does not establish that the duties of the proffered position 
require the theoretical and practical application of highly specialized knowledge and attainment of at least 
14 As discussed above, if the Petitioner relies on its claim that the proposed position is multifaceted and includes the duties 
of more than one related occupation, the Petitioner has not provided a certified LCA that corresponds to the position it 
claims it described in the petition. 
15 DOL's wage-level guidance specifies that a Level TI designation is reserved for positions involving only moderately 
complex tasks requiring limited judgment. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage 
Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http://flcdatacenter.com/ download/NPWH C _Guidance_ Revised_ 11 _ 2009 .pdf 
6 
a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. See section 214(i)(l) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(ii) (defining the term "specialty occupation). 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
7