dismissed H-1B Case: Information Technology Consulting

MATTER OF I-C-S-, INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: APR. 19,2017 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, an information technology and consulting company, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a "market research analyst" under the H-1 B nonimmigrant classification for specialty 
occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101(a)(l5)(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 Petitioner did 
not establish that the proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director erred in 
denying the petition. 
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 1-C-S-, Inc. 
(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). We have consistently interpreted 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"); Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). 
II. PROFFERED POSITION 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner listed the following duties for 
the Beneficiary: 
Research, Plan, Preparation, Data Collection and Validation- 30% 
• Understand and define customers' business requirement. Interact with clients & 
requirements team to understand business functionalities. Ability to translate 
business problems into analytic solutions using PSTS (Professional Services 
Tracking System). 
• Define data requirement, Data collection, Data management and Data validation 
using mathematical modeling and statistical tests with General Algebraic 
Modeling Systems (GAMS). 
• Query Processing using Simplex Methods, Queuing theory, Linear Programming 
• Identify and solve SDLC issues. Specify computational methods using simulation 
technologies such as ProModel. 
• Identify and solve SDLC issues. Specify computational methods using simulation 
technologies such as ProModel. Collaborate with decision makers to solve such 
issues. Work with technical team to identify and resolve key issues during 
complete SDLC 
• Policy formulation and other managerial functions 
• Research and analyze business ventures by using statistical analysis, data mining, 
simulation and othe~ analytical tools and techniques, such as SAS 
2 
.
Matter of 1-C-S-, Inc. 
• Prepare project plans & timelines 
• Determines the most appropriate analytical technique and identify performance 
improvement opportunities using Research on Decision Support Tool. 
• Project planning, current and future-state analysis 
Analysis, Data mining, Formulation, Implementation and Decision making- 40% 
• Perform Root cause analysis , Risk Analysis, using Statistical cost analysis to 
perform comparative market analysis 
• Data mining using tools like SAS and Pervasive Integration. 
• Evaluate alternative course of action models using proprietary tools PSTS 
• Mathematical modeling, Quantitative analysis, Validation and Testing to 
reformulate models. Ensure satisfactoriness by performing validation of models. 
Statistical analysis using proprietary software PSTS 
• Design and evaluate experimental operational models and alternative courses of 
action 
• Involved in top-level strategizing , planning , and forecasting . 
• Manage staffing needs, allocate and mentor resources , help and support them to 
understand customer requirement , measure performance , set prices. 
• Help in Decision making and apply analytical methods to help company making 
better decisions and improving efficiency. 
• Utilize discrete-event simulation technology like ProModel to help, making better 
decisions faster 
Report generation, Presentation, Prototypes creation- 301Yo 
• Prepare rep01ts, documentation , flow charts, create statistical diagrams and charts 
to interpret report to assist management with policy formulation and other 
managerial functions 
• Determine the most cost effective or profit-maximizing solution usmg 
Mathematical optimization techniques such as [sic] 
• Presents recommendations and solutions to technical as well as non-technical 
audiences , and to all levels of management, including senior executives 
• Create prototypes using MIS (Management Information Systems) techniques 
• Create presentation 
• Build statistical models to improve portfolio and campaign performance through 
better targeting and understanding. 
According to the Petitioner, the position can only be performed by an individual "holding a 
bachelor's degree or the equivalent in Business Administrations [sic], Mathematics, Information 
Technology, or Marketing." 
In addition, the Petitioner indicated that the Beneficiary would provide service to two clients , 
and The Petitioner provided letters 
from these clients explaining the Beneficiary ' s duties as follows: 
3 
Matter of 1-C-S-, Inc. 
• Research business need and identify prospective business and talent acquisition 
opportunities. 
• Collect data on consumers, competitors and market place and consolidate 
information into actionable items, reports and presentations 
• Communicating with clients to understand and document business objectives 
• Use statistical cost estimation methods to do comparative market analysis. 
• Perform industry domain specific research analysis for qualified and potential 
skilled resources in line with relevant technical job criteria using internal 
computer databases, social networking, internet recruiting models and employee 
referrals. 
• Initiate discussions with applicants to inform them of the technical scope of job, 
project & employment possibilities, consideration and selection and arrange for 
and conduct interviews of short listed applicants. 
• Solid ability to conduct different types of interviews (structured, competency 
based, stress etc.) 
• Hands on' experience with various selection processes (phone interviewing, 
reference check etc.) 
• Ability to organize assessment centers (in tray activities, work samples, 
psychometric and IQ/EQ tests etc.) 
• Assess applicants' relevant knowledge, skills, software skills, expenence and 
aptitudes 
• Working knowledge of Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS) and databases 
. Both clients also stated that the position required at least a bachelor's degree m business 
administration, mathematics, information technology, or marketing. 
III. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that the proffered position qualifies. as a specialty occupation. 
Specifically, the record does not establish that the job duties require an educational batkground, or 
its equivalent, commensurate with~ specialty occupation. 1 
As a preliminary matter, the Petitioner's claim that a bachelor's degree in business administration is 
a sufficient minimum requirement for entry into the proffered position is inadequate to establish that 
the proposed 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 and closely to 
the position in question. Since there must be a close correlation between the required spec~alized 
studies and the position, the requirement of a degree with a generalized title, such as business 
1 
The Petitioner submitted documentation in support of 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. 
4 
Matter of 1-C-S-, Inc. 
administration, without further specification, does not establish the position as a specialty 
occupation. Cf }vfatter ofl14ichael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. 558, 560 (Comm'r 1988). 
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 discussed supra, 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. 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, wi II not justify a finding 
that a particular position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. Royal Siam, 484 F.Jd 
at 147.2 
Again, the Petitioner in this matter claims that the duties of the proffered position can be performed 
by an individual with only a general-purpose bachelor's degree, i.e., a bachelor's degree in business 
administration. Without more, this assertion alone indicates that the proffered position is not in fact 
a specialty occupation. The Director's decision must therefore be affirmed and the appeal dismissed 
on this basis alone. 
Moreover, the Petitioner has submitted conflicting duty descriptions that leave question as to the 
substantive nature of the Beneficiary's duties. The Petitioner has provided duties reflective of a 
market research analyst, while the Petitioner's clients' duty descriptions include various human 
resources related duties, such as identifying talent acquisition opportunities, performing Internet 
recruiting, arranging and conducting interviews, checking references, and assessing the knowledge, 
skills, and experience of applicants. The Petitioner has not resolved these inconsistencies \Vith 
independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 19 l&N Dec. 582, 
591-92 (BIA 1988). 
While no provision in the law for specialty occupations permits the performance of non-qualifying 
duties, we view the performance of duties that are incidental 3 to the primary duties of the proffered 
position as acceptable when they are unpredictable, intermittent, and of a minor nature. Anything 
2 Specifically, the judge explained in Royal Siam, 484 F.3d at 147, that: 
The courts and the agency consistently have stated that, although a general-purpose bachelor's degree. 
such as a business administration degree, may be a legitimate prerequisite for a particular position, 
requiring such a degree, without more, will not justify the granting of a petition for an H-1 B specialty 
occupation visa. See, e.g. Tapis tnt'{ v. INS, 94 F.Supp.2d 172, 175-76 (D. Mass. 2000): .5hanti. 36 F. 
Supp. 2d at 1164-66; cf Matter ofA!ichael Hertz Assocs., 19 l & &N Dec. 558. 560 ([Comm'r] 1988) 
(providing frequently cited analysis in connection with a conceptually similar provision). This is as it 
should be: elsewise, an employer could ensure the granting of a specialty occupation visa petition by 
the simple expedient of creating a generic (and essentially artificial) degree requirement. 
1 The two definitions of "incidental" in Webster's New College Dictionary are ''1. Occurring or apt to occur as an 
unpredictable or minor concomitant ... [and] 2. Of a minor, casuaL or subordinate nature .... " Incidental, Webster's 
New College Dictionary (3rd ed. 2008). 
5 
Matter of 1-C-S-, Inc. 
beyond such incidental duties, however, e.g., predictable, recurring, and substantive job 
responsibilities, must be specialty occupation duties or the proffered position as a whole cannot be 
approved as a specialty occupation. Assuming that the proffered position is in fact a market research 
analyst position, however, we will nevertheless perform a complete specialty occupation analysis 
under each ofthe four alternative criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
A. First Criterion 
We turn first to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l), which requires that a baccalaureate 
or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for 
entry into the particular position. To inform this inquiry, we recognize the U.S. Department of Labor's 
(DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) as an authoritative source on the duties and 
educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses.4 
On the labor condition application (LCA) submitted in support of the H-lB petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the occupational category "Market Research Analysts and 
Marketing Specialists," corresponding to the Standard Occupational Classification code 13-1161. 
In pertinent part, the Handbook states that "[ m ]arket research analysts typically need a bachelor's 
degree in market research or a related field. Many have degrees in fields such as statistics, math, and 
computer science. Others have backgrounds in business administration, the social sciences, or 
communications." 5 The Handbook does not indicate that a bachelor's degree in a ~pecific ,\]Jecialty, 
or the equivalent, is normally required for entry into this occupation. While the Handbook states that 
market research analysts typically need a bachelor's degree in or related to market research, it also 
states that "[ m]any" market research analysts have degrees in various other fields such as statistics, 
math, and computer science. Based on the various degrees which many research analysts can 
possess, the Handbook does not support the position's eligibility under the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). 
In general, provided the specialties are closely related, e.g., statistics and math, a minimum of a 
bachelor's or higher degree in more than one specialty is recognized as satisfying the "degree in the 
specific specialty" 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, 
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 we regularly review 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 pmticular position 
would normally have a minimum, specialty degree requirement, or its equivalent, for entry. 
5 
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2016-17 ed., 
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/business-and-financiallprint/market-research-analysts.htm (last visited Apr. 7, 20 17). 
6 
Matter of 1-C-S-, Inc. 
a minimum entry requirement of degrees in disparate fields, such as market research and computer 
science, would not meet the statutory requirement that the degree be "in the specific specialty," 
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) of the Act (emphasis added). 6 The 
Petitioner has not done so here. 
Moreover, the Handbook indicates that general-purpose bachelor's degrees in business 
administration and the social sciences are acceptable for entry into the market research analyst 
occupation. Again, a minimum requirement of a general-purpose bachelor's degree, such as a 
business administration degree, without more, will not justify a finding that a particular position 
qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. See Royal Siam, 484 F.3d at 147; cf Michael 
Hertz, 19 I&N Dec. at 560. 
The Petitioner also points to the Handbook and the Occupational Information Network's (O*NET) 
descriptions of market research analysts and contends that they establish that a bachelor's degree is 
required for the position. However, as noted, in order to establish the proffered position as a 
specialty occupation, the Petitioner must demonstrate that not only a bachelor's degree is required 
for minimum entry into the position, but that the required degree is a degree in a specific specialty. 
Although the O*NET description of market research analysts and marketing specialists indicates that 
the vast majority of those employed in these positions have a bachelor's degrees, it does not indicate 
that these positions require a degree in a specific specialty for entry. O*NET OnLine Summary 
Report for "13-1161.00 Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists," 
http://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/13-11614.00 (last visited Apr. 7, 20 17). 
Furthermore, on appeal, the Petitioner cites to Tapis lnt 'l v. INS, 94 F. Supp. 2d 172 (D. Mass. 2000) 
and asserts that this stands for the proposition that we must focus on the knowledge and coursework 
required for the position and not simply the type of degree required. 
We note that 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-1 8 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 lnt 'l, 94 F. Supp. 2d at 176. The court elaborated that "[i]n fields 
6 
Whether read with the statutory "the" or the regulatory "a,'' both readings denote a singular "specialty." Section 
214(i)(l )(B) ofthe Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). Still, 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. As just stated, this also includes even seemingly disparate specialties provided the 
evidence of record establishes how each acceptable, specific field of study is directly related to the duties and 
responsibilities of the particular position. 
7 
Matter of 1-C-S-, Inc. 
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." !d. at 1 77. 
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. However, as discussed, 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. A minimum entry requirement of 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)(l)(B) ofthe 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)(l)(A) and (B) of the Act have been satisfied, then the proffered 
position may qualify as a specialty occupation. However, we do not find that the U.S. district court 
is stating that any position can qualify as a specialty occupation based solely on the claimed 
requirements of a petitioner. 
We must examine the actual employment requirements, and, on the basis of that examination, 
determine whether the position qualities as a specialty occupation. See generally Defensor, 201 F. 
3d at 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, we 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. 
We 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 occti'pation. We are required instead to follow long-standing 
8 
' 
Matter of 1-C-S-, Inc. 
legal standards and determine first, whether the proffered· position qualifies as a specialty 
occupation, and second, whether the beneficiary was qualified for the position at the time the 
nonimmigrant visa petition was filed. Cf Michael Hertz, 19 I&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 has furnished insufficient evidence to establish that the facts of the instant petition are 
analogous to those in Tapis. We also note that, in contrastto 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 ol 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. Id. 
The Petitioner has not provided documentation from another probative source to substantiate its 
assertions regarding the minimum requirement for entry into this particular position under this 
criterion. 7 Thus, the Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A)(J). 
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. 
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 organiz~tions. 
In determining whether there is such a common degree requirement, factors often considered 
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 
7 On appeal, the Petitioner also cites to Residential Fin. Corp. v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services, 839 F. Supp. 
2d 985 (S.D. Ohio 2012), in support of its assertion that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. The 
Petitioner has furnished insufficient evidence to establish that the facts of the instant petition are analogous to those in 
that decision. 
9 
Matter of 1-C-S-, Inc. 
recruit only degreed individuals." See Shanti. Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151, 1165 (D.Minn. 
1999)(quotingHird/BlakerCorp. v. Sava, 712F. Supp. 1095, 1102(S.D.N.Y. 1989)). 
As 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. In addition, there are no submissions from the industry's 
professional association indicating that it has made a degree a minimum entry requirement. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner did not submit any letters or attidavits ±rom similar firms or individuals in 
the Petitioner's industry attesting that such firms "routinely employ and recruit only degreed 
individuals." Nor is there any other evidence relevant to this prong. Thus, we find that the Petitioner 
has not satisfied the first alternative prong of8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
2. Second Prong 
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. 
The Petitioner states that the Beneficiary's duties are "complex." However, the Petitioner does not 
articulate why the Beneficiary's duties are complex or how they are different from other market 
research analysts placed in parallel positions in the industry. In addition, the Petitioner does not 
credibly demonstrate exactly what the Beneficiary will do on a day-to-day basis such that 
complexity or uniqueness can even be determined. In fact, as we have discussed, the Petitioner has 
provided two conflicting duty descriptions leaving question as to the Beneficiary's actual day-to-day 
duties. Furthermore, the record does not sufficiently develop relative complexity or uniqueness as 
an aspect of the proffered position of market research analyst. 
Even though the Petitioner claims that the proffered position's duties are so complex and unique that 
a bachelor's degree is required, the Petitioner does not demonstrate how the market research analyst 
duties described 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. We acknowledge that the Petitioner has submitted information on courses 
that would assist the Beneficiary in performing the duties of his position such as principles of 
management, business mathematics and statistics, managerial economics, applied operations 
research, amongst others. However, while a few related courses may be beneficial in performing 
certain duties of the position, the Petitioner has not demonstrated how an established curriculum of 
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. 
Therefore, the evidence of record does not establish that this position is significantly different from 
other market research analyst positions such that it refutes the Handbook's information to the effect 
10 
Matter of 1-C-S-, Inc. 
that there is a spectrum of preferred degrees acceptable for such positions, including degrees not in a 
specific specialty. As the Petitioner does not demonstrate how the proffered position of market 
research analyst is so complex or unique relative to other similar positions that do not require at least 
a baccalaureate degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, for entry into the occupation in the 
United States. Therefore, 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. 
To satisfy this criterion, the record must establish that the specific performance requirements of the 
position generated the recruiting and hiring history. A petitioner's declaration of a particular 
educational requirement will not mask the fact that the position is not a specialty occupation. We 
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, 201 F.3d at 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 the specific specialty, or its equivalent, as the 
minimum for entry into the occupation as required by section 214(i)( 1) of the Act. According to the 
Court in Defensor, "To interpret the regulations any other way would lead to an absurd result." ld. 
at 388. If we were constrained to recognize a specialty occupation merely because the petitioner has 
an established practice of demanding certain educational requirements for the proffered position -
and without consideration of how a beneficiary is to be specifically employed - then any beneficiary 
with a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty could be brought into the United States to perform 
non-specialty occupations, so long as the employer required all such employees to have 
baccalaureate or higher degrees. See id. 
The Petitioner submits IRS Forms W-2, Wage and Tax Statements and supporting degree 
documentation relevant to five other market research analyst positions . The evidence reflected that 
these employees hold degrees such as a general bachelor's degree, a bachelor's degree in accounting, 
a bachelor's degree in the arts, a bachelor's degree in computer science, a bachelor's of science 
degree, and a master's in business administration. First, the Petitioner has not provided duties for 
these positons to establish that they were similar to the position proffered. As we have noted, the 
Petitioner has provided conflicting duty descriptions for the Beneficiary; therefore, it is not clear 
what duties these previous market research analysts may have performed. Further, the degrees held 
by these former market research analysts do not reflect that a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty is required for this position. Rather, the degrees held by these employees indicate that a 
wide range of degree would suffice, including a general bachelor's degree, or degrees in the arts, 
accounting, or computer science. The Petitioner asserts that the proffered position requires a 
bachelor's degree in business administration, mathematics, information technology, or marketing. 
I I 
Matter of 1-C-S-, Inc. 
However, the degrees held by its former market research analysts do not support this contention, 
indicating other degrees such as computer science, accounting, the arts, or simply a general degree. 
Finally, many of the degrees appear to have been earned at foreign institutions; however, as the 
Petitioner did not submit educational evaluations of these degrees earned overseas, it is not clear that 
these degrees are equivalent to a bachelor's degree in any specific specialty. 
The record does not establish that the Petitioner normally requires at least a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent, directly related to the duties of the position. Therefore, the 
Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3). 
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. 
The Petitioner states that the Beneficiary's duties are "specialized." However, the Petitioner does 
not articulate why the Beneficiary's duties are specialized or how they are different from other 
market research analysts placed in parallel positions in the industry. The proposed duties have not 
been described with sufficient specificity to show that their nature is more specialized and complex 
than market analyst positions whose duties are not of a nature so specialized and complex that their 
performance requires knowledge usually associated with a degree in a specific specialty. Thus, 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). 
Because the Petitioner has not satisfied one ofthe criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), it has not 
demonstrated that the proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation. 
IV. CONCLUSION 
The appeal is dismissed because the Petitioner has not established that the proffered position is a 
specialty occupation. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of!-C-S-. Inc., ID# 347340 (AAO Apr. 19, 2017) 
12