dismissed H-1B Case: Jewelry Wholesale

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF D-D-, LLC 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: OCT. 14, 2015 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a jewelry and watch wholesaler, seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a marketing 
specialist and classify her as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation. See section 
101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101 ( a)(15)(H)(i)(b ). The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the petition. The matter is 
now before us on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The Director denied the petition, concluding that the evidence of record did not establish that the 
proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
The record of proceeding before us contains the following: (1) the Form I-129 and supporting 
documentation; (2) the Director's request for additional evidence (RFE); (3) the Petitioner's 
response to the RFE; (4) the Director's letter denying the petition; and {5) the Form I-290B, Notice 
of Appeal or Motion, and supporting documentation. 
Upon review of the entire record of proceeding, we find that the evidence of record does not overcome 
the Director's basis for denying this petition. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed .. 
I. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION 
The issue before us is whether the evidence of record establishes by a preponderance of the evidence 
that the Petitioner will employ the Beneficiary in a specialty occupation position. 1 
A. Legal Framework 
For an H-1B petition to be granted, the Petitioner must provide sufficient evidence to establish that it 
will employ the Beneficiary in a specialty occupation position. To meet its burden of proof in this 
1 
The "preponderance of the evidence" standard requires that the evidence demonstrate that the applicant's claim is 
"probably true," where the determination of "truth" is made based on the factual circumstances of each individual 
case. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369,376 (AAO 2010) (citing Matter of E-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 77,79-80 (Comm'r 
1989)). 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
regard, the Petitioner must establish that the employment it is offering to the Beneficiary meets the 
applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. 
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) states, in pertinent part, the following: 
Specialty occupation means an occupation which [(1)] requires theoretical and 
practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge in fields of human 
endeavor including, but not limited to, architecture, engineering, mathematics, 
physical sciences, social sciences, medicine and health, education, business 
specialties, accounting, law, theology, and the arts, and which [(2)] requires the 
attainment of a bachelor's degree or higher in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, as 
a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States. 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty occupation, a proposed position 
must meet one of the following criteria: 
(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 a 
baccalaureate or higher degree. 
As a threshold issue, it is noted that 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) must logically be read together 
with section 214(i)(l) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). In other words, this regulatory 
language must be construed in harmony with the thrust of the related provisions and with the statute 
as a whole. SeeK Mart Corp. v. Cartier, Inc., 486 U.S. 281, 291 (1988) (holding that construction 
of language which takes into account the design of the statute as a whole is preferred); see also COlT 
2 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
Independence Joint Venture v. Federal Sav. And Loan Ins. Corp., 489 U.S. 561 (1989); Matter ofW­
F-, 21 I&N Dec. 503 (BIA 1996). As such, the criteria stated in 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) 
should logically be read as being necessary but not necessarily sufficient to meet the statutory and 
regulatory definition of specialty occupation. To otherwise interpret this section as stating the 
necessary and sufficient conditions for meeting the definition of specialty occupation would result in 
particular positions meeting a condition under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) but not the statutory or 
regulatory definition. See Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F.3d 387. To avoid this result, 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) must therefore be read as providing supplemental criteria that must be met in 
accordance with, and not as alternatives to, the statutory and regulatory definitions of specialty 
occupation. 
As such and consonant with section 214(i)(1) of the Act and the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(ii), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) consistently interprets the 
term "degree" in the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to mean not just any baccalaureate or 
higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proffered position. See 
Royal Siam Corp. v. Cherto.ff, 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"). Applying this standard, USCIS regularly approves H-1B petitions for qualified foreign 
nationals who are to be employed as engineers, computer scientists, certified public accountants, 
college professors, and other such occupations. These professions, for which petitioners have 
regularly been able to establish a minimum entry requirement in the United States of a baccalaureate 
or higher degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent directly related to the duties and 
responsibilities of the particular position, fairly represent the types of specialty occupations that 
Congress contemplated when it created the H -1 B visa category. 
To determine whether a particular job qualifies as a specialty occupation, USCIS does not simply 
rely on a position's title. The specific duties of the proffered position, combined with the nature of 
the petitioning entity's business operations, are factors to be considered. users must examine the 
ultimate employment of the foreign national, and determine whether the position qualifies as a 
specialty occupation. See generally Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F. 3d 384. The critical element is not 
the title of the position nor an employer's self-imposed standards, but whether the position actually 
requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and the 
attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in the specific specialty as the minimum for entry into 
the occupation, as required by the Act. 
B. The Proffered Position 
The Petitioner provided the following information regarding the duties of the proffered position in a 
document titled "Marketing Specialist": 
Responsibilities: 
• Analyze the company's marketing progress, strengths, and new opportunities. 
3 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
• Personally participate in company sales and promotional events, including 
trade shows. 
• Work closely with the Board of Directors and company President to develop 
and manage new and existing strategies and programs, incorporating ideas 
and initiatives in order to create a successful marketing program. 
• Establish and manage marketing relationships with vendors. 
• Conduct market research to determine local and regional market preferences 
for jewelry designs, materials, sizes, and colors. 
• Work with web and social media coordinator regarding online marketing and 
sales. 
• Determine the company's position in the US marketplace. 
• Perform data analysis on competitors, their products, prices, and marketing 
techniques in order to assess company's market position. 
• Collect and analyze data on customer demographics, preferences, needs, and 
buying habits to identify potential markets and factors affecting product 
demand. 
• Devise and evaluate methods and procedures for collecting data, such as 
surveys, opinion polls, or questionnaires. 
• Monitor industry statistics and follow trends in trade literature. 
• Measure and assess customer and employee satisfaction. 
• Measure the effectiveness of marketing, advertising, and communications 
programs and strategies. 
• Forecast and track marketing and sales trends, analyzing collected data. 
• Attend staff conferences to provide management with information and 
proposals concerning the promotion, distribution, design, and pricing of 
company products or services. 
Although the Petitioner listed "Bachelor's degree" as its minimum education requirement, it did not 
state that the requisite bachelor's degree needed to be in any particular specialty. 
The record also contains a document titled "Duties of Marketing Specialist," in which the Petitioner 
grouped the duties of the proffered position into four categories and indicated the percentage of time 
the Beneficiary would spend on each category as follows: 
Market Research and Evaluation: Devise and evaluate methods and 
procedures for collecting data, such as surveys, opinion polls, or questionnaires, or 
arrange to obtain existing data. Conduct all United States market research to 
determine local customers' preference for jewelry designs, materials, sizes, colors. 
Gather data on competitors, their products, prices, and marketing techniques. 
Evaluat[ e] market research in order to suggest modifications for the selection of 
jewelry being imported to the United States[,] which would be more in line with the 
American market. Measure the effectiveness of marketing, advertising, and 
communications programs and strategies; provide and present these findings to the 
4 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
Board of Directors and President. Forecast and track marketing and sales trends, 
analyze and present collected data along with suggestions to the Board and 
President. Attend staff conferences to provide management with information and 
proposals concerning the promotion, distribution, design, and pricing of company 
products or services. Market research of future markets, specifically, South East 
Asia, Canada and the Caribbean. [40%.] 
Manage marketing campaigns (wholesale and online): Attendance and 
supervision of trade shows. Personally participate in company's sales and 
promotional events, including trade shows[.] Directly manage the logistics 
coordinator in the scheduling of jewelry shows and the details of the attendance of 
these shows[.] Strategize and oversee online marketing campaigns. Coordinate 
website design and development for the purpose of brand awareness and strategize 
online marketing campaigns to increase online jewelry sales. Work with web and 
social media coordinator regarding online marketing and sales. Establish and 
manage marketing relationships with vendors. Develop relationships and conduct 
all direct marketing to retail businesses, conduct sales at special events. [40%.] 
Manage sales staff: Oversee and train the sales associates. Ensure staff 
adherences to customer relations standards set forth in the company. Ensure artistic 
presentation of the jewelry is performed in accordance with optimal showcasing of 
the jewelry[.] [1 0%.] 
Secondary Duties: Monitor and oversee response to customer complaints 
and issues. Provide weekly reports on jewelry sales figures broken down by piece 
and providing suggestions based on sales trends. [ 1 0%. f 
2 It is not clear that the latter two sets of duties, which would collectively take up twenty percent of the beneficiary's 
time, are those of a position falling within the occupational category designated on the LCA. Managing a company's 
sales staff and responding to complaints lodged by its customers fall outside the duties of positions located within the 
occupational category selected by the Petitioner on the LCA. Moreover, it is not clear that such duties would comprise a 
specialty occupation position. 
When a petitioner seeks to employ a beneficiary in two distinct occupations, it should file two separate petitions, 
requesting concurrent, part-time employment for each occupation. If a petitioner does not file two separate petitions and 
if only one aspect of a combined position qualifies as a specialty occupation, USCIS would be required to deny the entire 
petition as the pertinent regulations do not permit the partial approval of only a portion of a proffered position and/or the 
limiting of the approval of a petition to perform only certain duties. See generally 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h). Furthermore and 
as is the case here, the petitioner would need to ensure that it separately meets all requirements relevant to each 
occupation and the payment of wages commensurate with the higher paying occupation. See generally 8 C. F. R. § 
2 I 4.2(h); 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/pdf/NPWHC _Guidance_ Revised _11_2009.pdf Thus, filing separate petitions 
would help ensure that the petitioner submits the requisite evidence pertinent to each occupation and would help 
eliminate confusion with regard to the proper classification of the position being offered. 
5 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
On appeal, the Petitioner reiterated essentially the same duties and stated that it requires "an 
individual who possesses a U.S. Bachelor's Degree, or its equivalent, as well as knowledge and 
experience with the marketing of a jewelry line." 
C. Analysis 
Turning to the criteria set forth at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), we will now review the Director's 
decision denying the petition. 
A baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is 
normally the minimum requirement.for entry into the particular position 
USCIS recognizes 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. 3 The Petitioner asserted in the LCA that the proffered position falls 
under the occupational category "Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists." 
The subchapter of the Handbook entitled "How to Become a Market Research Analyst" states, in 
relevant part, the following about this occupational category: 
Education 
Market 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. 
Courses in statistics, research methods, and marketing are essential for these 
workers. Courses in communications and social sciences, such as economics, 
psychology, and sociology, are also important. 
Some market research analyst jobs require a master's degree. Several schools 
offer graduate programs in marketing research, but many analysts complete degrees 
in other fields, such as statistics and marketing, and/or earn a Master of Business 
Administration (MBA). A master's degree is often required for leadership positions or 
positions that perform more technical research. 
Other Experience 
Most market research analysts can benefit from internships or work 
experience in business, marketing, or sales. Work experience in other positions that 
3 All of the references are to the 2014-2015 edition of the Handbook, which may be accessed at the Internet site 
http://www.bls.gov/OCO/. · The excerpts of the Handbook regarding the duties and requirements of the referenced 
occupational category are hereby incorporated into the record of proceeding. 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
require analyzing data, writing reports, or surveying or collecting data can also be 
helpful in finding a market research position. 
Licenses, Certifications, and Registrations 
Certification is voluntary, but analysts may pursue certification to demonstrate 
a level of professional competency. The Marketing Research Association offers the 
Professional Researcher Certification (PRC) for market research analysts. Candidates 
qualify based on experience and knowledge; they must pass an exam, be a member of 
a professional organization, and have at least 3 years working in opinion and 
marketing research. 
U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2014-15 ed., 
Market Research Analysts, on the Internet at http://www.bls.gov/ooh/business-and-financiallmarket­
research-analysts.htm#tab-4 (last visited Oct. 13, 2015). 
The Handbook reports that market research analysts have degrees and backgrounds in a wide-variety 
of disparate fields. That is, while the Handbook states that employees typically need a bachelor's 
degree in market research or a related field, it continues by specifying that many market research 
analysts have degrees in fields such as statistics, math, or computer science. According to the 
Handbook, other market research analysts have backgrounds in fields such as business 
administration, the social sciences, or communications. This passage of the Handbook identifies 
various courses as essential to this occupation, including statistics, research methods, and marketing. 
It further elucidates that courses in communications and social sciences (such as economics, 
psychology, and sociology) are also important. Therefore, although the Handbook indicates that 
market research analysts typically need an advanced degree, it also indicates that degrees and 
backgrounds in various fields are acceptable for jobs in this occupation- including computer science 
and the social sciences, as well as statistics and communications. 
In general, provided the specialties are closely related, e.g., chemistry and biochemistry, a minimum 
of a bachelor's or higher degree in more than one specialty is recognized as satisfying the "degree in 
the specific specialty (or its equivalent)" requirement of section 214(i)(l )(B) of the Act. In such a 
case, the required "body of highly specialized knowledge" would essentially be the same. Since 
there must be a close correlation between the required "body of highly specialized knowledge" and 
the position, however, a minimum entry requirement of a degree in 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.4 Section 
214(i)(l )(B) of the Act (emphasis added). 
4 Whether read with the statutory "the" or the regulatory "a," both readings denote a singular "specialty." Section 
214(i)(l )(B) of the 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 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
The Handbook also states that "others have a background in business administration." Although a 
general-purpose bachelor's degree, such as a degree in business administration, may be a legitimate 
prerequisite for a particular position, requiring such a degree, without more, will not justify a finding 
that a particular position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. See Royal Siam Corp. 
v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d 139 at 147.5 
That is, USCIS interprets the degree requirement at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to require a degree 
in a specific specialty (or its equivalent) that is directly related to the proposed position. Since there 
must be a close correlation between the required specialized studies and the position, the 
requirement of a degree with a generalized title, such as business administration, without further 
specification, does not establish the position as a specialty occupation. C.f Matter of Michael Hertz 
Associates, 19 I&N Dec. 558 (Comm'r 1988). Therefore, the Handbook's recognition that a general, 
non-specialty "background" in business administration is sufficient for entry into the occupation 
strongly suggests that a bachelor's degree in a spec?fic specialty is not normally the minimum entry 
requirement for this occupation, 
The narrative of the Handbook further reports that some employees obtain professional certification 
to demonstrate a level of professional competency. It continues by outlining the requirements for 
market research analysts to achieve the Professional Researcher Certification (PRC), and states that 
candidates qualify based upon their experience and knowledge. According to the Handbook, the 
credential is granted by the Marketing Research Association to those who pass an exam and have at 
least three years of experience working in opinion and market research. 6 
We reviewed the Marketing Research Association's website, which confirms the Handbook's 
statement regarding the requirements for professional certification (i.e., passage of an exam and 
one closely related specialty. 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. 
5 Specifically, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit explained in Royal Siam that: 
!d. 
[t]he 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 8 specialty occupation visa. See, e.g., Tapis lnt'l v. INS, 94 F.Supp.2d 172, 175-76 (D.Mass. 
2000); Shanti, 36 F. Supp.2d at 1164-66; cf Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I & 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. 
6 The Marketing Research Association website states that the association was founded in 1957 and is the leading and 
largest association of opinion and marketing research professions. For additional information, see 
http://www.marketingresearch.org/information (last visited Oct. 13, 20 15). 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
three years of relevant industry experience), and further specifies that the "Education" necessary to 
apply for professional certification is "12 industry-related education hours within the two preceding 
years." The Market Research Association website provides the following information about the 
Professional Researcher Certification program: 
The Professional Researcher Certification program (PRC) is designed to 
recognize the qualifications and expertise of marketing and opinion research 
professionals. The goal of PRC is to encourage high standards within the survey 
profession to raise competency, establish an objective measure of an individual's 
knowledge and proficiency and to encourage professional development. Achieving 
and maintaining PRC validates the knowledge of the market research industry and 
puts researchers in a selectgroup oflike-minded professionals. 
Because PRC indicates to the public your ability to conduct marketing 
research, the PRC Board requires [a candidate] to have experience in the survey and 
opinion process. Three years of relevant experience is required. . . . A total of 12 
industry-related education hours within the two preceding years are required at time 
of application. Conferences, seminars, webinars, etc., must be added to [the 
candidate's] record. 
The benefits of a Certification program are both industry-wide and individual. 
For the individual, it is a means of differentiating oneself, a "badge" of competence in 
the given areas and an assurance that the individual is current in knowledge and 
experience. For the profession/industry as a whole, it provides a vehicle for 
developing a pool of well-trained, competent marketing researchers, thereby 
improving both perceived and substantive standards. 
Market Res. Ass'n, http://marketingresearch.org/prc-faq (last visited Oct. 13, 2015). 
The Market Research Association emphasizes that the credentialing program recognizes the 
qualifications and expertise of marketing and opinion research professionals, encourages high 
standards within the profession, and establishes an objective measure of an individual's knowledge 
and proficiency. According to the association's website, the credential indicates to the public an 
individual's ability to conduct market research. The narrative continues by stating that the credential 
provides a vehicle for developing a pool of well-trained, competent marketing researchers, thereby 
improving both perceived and substantive standards. The website does not indicate that the market 
research analyst positions have any particular academic requirements for entry, nor does it indicate 
that these positions require any particular level of education to be identified as qualified and 
possessing a level of expertise/competence. Instead, the Market Research Association highlights the 
9 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
importance of professional experience and industry-related professional courses (through 
conferences, seminars, and webinars). 
Thus, the Handbook and the Market Research Association website do not support the claim that the 
occupational category "Market Research Analysts" is one for which normally the minimum 
requirement for entry is a baccalaureate degree (or higher) in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. Even if it did (which it does not), to satisfy the first criterion, the petitioner must provide 
evidence to support a finding that the particular position proffered would normally have such a 
minimum, specialty degree requirement or its equivalent. 
On appeal, the Petitioner cites to a recent district court case, Raj and Company v. US. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services, 85 F. Supp. 3d 1241 (W.D. Wash. 2015), and claims that it is relevant 
here. 7 In the district court case, the employer designated the position as a "Marketing Analyst & 
Specialist" position.8 We reviewed the decision; however, there is no indication that aspects of the 
work such as the duties and responsibilities, level of judgment, complexity of the job duties, 
supervisory duties, independent judgment required or the amount of supervision received are 
analogous to the proffered position here.9 Accordingly, aside from the claimed occupational 
category, there is no indication that the positions are similar. 
Further, in Raj, the court stated that a specialty occupation requires the attainment of a bachelor's 
degree or higher in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. The court confirmed that this issue is well­
settled in case law and with USCIS 's reasonable interpretation of the regulatory framework. In the 
decision, the court noted that "permitting an occupation to qualify simply by requiring a generalized 
bachelor degree would run contrary to congressional intent to provide a visa program for specialized, 
as opposed to merely educated, workers." The court stated that the regulatory provisions do not 
restrict qualifying occupations to those for which there exists a single, specifically tailored and titled 
degree program; but rather, the statute and regulations contain an equivalency provision. 10 
In Raj, the court concluded that the employer met the first criterion. We must note, however, that 
the court stated that "[t]he first regulatory criterion requires the agency to examine the generic 
7 In contrast to the broad precedential authority of the case law of a United States circuit court, we are not bound to 
follow the published decision of a United States district court in matters arising even within the same district. See Matter 
ofK-S-, 20 I&N Dec. 715 (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. !d. at 719. 
8 It is important to note and distinguish within the court's decision that "Marketing Analyst & Specialist" refers to the 
employer's particular position, whereas "Market Research Analysts" refers to a general occupational category. 
9 
We note that the Director's decision was not appealed to our office. Based on the district court's findings and 
description of the record, if that matter had first been appealed through the available administrative process, we may very 
well have remanded the matter to the service center for a new decision in our de novo review of the matter. 
10 We agree with the court that a specialty occupation is one that requires the attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree 
in a specific specialty or its equivalent. We further note that a petitioner must also demonstrate that the position requires 
the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge in accordance with section 
214(i)(l)(B) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii), and satisfy one of the four criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A). 
10 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
pos1t10n requirements of a market research analyst in order to determine whether a specific 
bachelor's degree or its equivalent is a minimum requirement for entry into the profession." Thus, 
the decision misstates the regulatory requirement. That is, the first criterion requires the Petitioner to 
establish that a baccalaureate or higher degree (in a specific specialty) or its equivalent is normally 
the minimum requirement for entry into the particular position. 
Consequently, if the court meant to suggest that any position classified under the occupational 
category "Market Research Analysts" would, as it stated, "come within the first qualifying criteria" -
we must disagree. 11 The occupational category designated by a petitioner is considered as an aspect 
in establishing the general tasks and responsibilities of a proffered position, and users regularly 
reviews the Handbook on the duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations 
that it addresses. However, 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. That is, to determine whether a 
particular job qualifies as a specialty occupation, users does not simply rely on a position's title or 
designated occupational category. The specific duties of the proffered position, combined with the 
nature of the petitioning entity's business operations, are factors to. be considered. users must 
examine the ultimate employment of the beneficiary, and determine whether the position qualifies as 
a specialty occupation. See generally Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F.3d at 384. 
Nevertheless, it is important to note that the court in Raj determined that the evidence in the record 
demonstrated that the particular position proffered required a bachelor's degree in market research or 
its equivalent as a minimum for entry. Further, the court noted that "[t]he patently specialized nature 
of the position sets it apart from those that merely require a generic degree." The position in Raj can, 
therefore, be distinguished from the instant position. Here, the duties and requirements of the 
position as described in the record of proceeding do not indicate that this particular position 
proffered by the Petitioner is one for which a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, 
or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for entry. Thus, the Petitioner has not 
satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(J). 
On appeal, the Petitioner also cites to Residential Fin. Corp. v. US. Citizenship & Immigration 
Services, 839 F. Supp. 2d 985 (S.D. Ohio 2012) as relevant here. As in Raj, the H-1B petition in 
Residential Fin. Corp. was never appealed to our office through the available administrative process. 
Nevertheless we note that the district judge's decision in Residential Fin. Corp. appears to have been 
based largely on the many factual errors made by the service center in its decision denying the 
petition. Had we been afforded the opportunity to do so, based on that court's findings, we may very 
well have remanded the matter to the service center for a new decision for many of the same reasons 
articulated by the district court if these errors could not have been remedied by our de novo review 
11 
In Raj, the court quoted a brief excerpt from the Handbook; however, the quotation is from the 2012-2013. edition 
rather than the current 2014-2015 edition (which contains several revisions). Further, we observe that the court did not 
address the section of the Handbook indicating that there are no specific degree requirements to obtain the Professional 
Researcher Certification credential -and therefore to work as a market research analyst. 
11 
Matter ofD-D-, LLC 
of the matter. It is important to note that in a subsequent case that was reviewed in the same 
jurisdiction, the court agreed with our analysis of Residential Fin. Corp. See Health Carousel, LLC 
v. US Citizenship & Immigration Services, No. 1:13-CV-23, 2014 WL 29591 (S.D. Ohio 2014). 
Moreover, the Petitioner's requirement of a "Bachelor's degree" without indicating a specialty 
underscores our finding that the proffered position is not a specialty occupation. The requirement of a 
bachelor's degree alone 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. Again, since there must be a close 
correlation between the required specialized studies and the position, the requirement of a degree 
with a generalized title without further specification, does not establish the position as a specialty 
occupation. Cf Matter of Michael Hertz Associates, 19 I&N Dec. at 558. To prove that a job 
requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge as 
required by section 214(i)(l) 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, USCIS interprets the degree requirement at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to 
require a degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proposed position. USCIS has 
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 finding that a particular position qualifies for classification as a 
specialty occupation. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Cherto,[f, 484 F.3d at 147. 
The Petitioner also relies on the DOL's O*NET Summary Report for "13-1161.00 - Market 
Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists." As counsel acknowledges, under the subsection 
titled "Education," O*NET states that "[m]ost of these occupations require a four-year bachelor's 
degree, but some do not." Moreover, O*NET does not state that a degree must be in a specific 
specialty, which undermines the Petitioner's assertion that the proffered position is a specialty 
occupation requiring a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. Therefore, the 
Petitioner's reliance on O*Net is misplaced. 
The Petitioner further references unpublished decisions in which we determined that the positions 
proffered in those matters qualified as a specialty occupation. The Petitioner has furnished no 
evidence to establish that the facts of the instant petition are analogous to those in the unpublished 
decisions. While 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(c) provides that our precedent decisions are binding on all USCIS 
employees in the administration ofthe Act, unpublished decisions are not similarly binding. 
It is incumbent upon the Petitioner to provide persuasive evidence that the proffered position 
qualifies as a specialty occupation under this criterion, notwithstanding the absence of Handbook 
support on the issue. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iv) provides that "[a]n H-1B petition 
involving a specialty occupation shall be accompanied by [ d]ocumentation ... or any other required 
evidence sufficient to establish ... that the services the beneficiary is to perform are in a specialty 
occupation." Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for 
purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter o.f So,fjici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 
12 
(b)(6)
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
165 (Comm'r 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of Cal., 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg'l Comm'r 
1972)). 
Upon review of the totality of the evidence in the entire record of proceeding, we conclude that the 
Petitioner has not established that the proffered position falls within an occupational category for which 
the Handbook, or other authoritative source, 12 indicates that a requirement for at least a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally required for entry into the occupation. 
Furthermore, the duties and requirements of the proffered position as described in the record of 
proceeding do not indicate that the particular position that is the subject of this petition is one for which 
a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry. Thus, the Petitioner has not satisfied the first criterion at 8 C.P.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
The requirement of a baccalaureate or higher degree in a spec(fic specialty, 
or its equivalent, is common to the industry in parallel 
positions among similar organizations 
Next, we will review the record of proceeding regarding the first of the two alternative prongs of 
8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). This prong alternatively calls for a petitioner to establish that a 
requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common for 
positions that are identifiable as being (1) in the petitioner's industry, (2) parallel to the proffered 
position, and also (3) located in organizations that are similar to the petitioner. 
In determining whether there is such a common degree requirement, factors often considered by 
USCIS include: whether the Handbook reports that the industry requires a degree; whether the 
industry's professional association has made a degree a minimum entry requirement; and whether 
letters or affidavits from firms or individuals in the industry attest that such firms "routinely employ 
and recruit only degreed individuals." See Shanti, Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151, 1165 (D. Minn. 
1999) (quoting Hird/Blaker Corp. v. Sava, 712 F. Supp. 1095, 1102 (S.D.N. Y. 1989)). 
As previously discussed, the Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one for which 
the Handbook (or other independent, authoritative source) reports a standard 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 his October 6, 2014 letter, the Manager of 
states that in order to stay competitive, many small jewelers find it 
"necessary to hire a marketing specialist (i.e., someone with a bachelor's degree in marketing or a 
related area, or equivalent marketing experience.)." emphasizes the competitive 
nature of 
the jewelry business and states that hiring marketing specialists in-house gives business oWners "a 
12 The Petitioner claims on appeal that the Director "relies too heavily" on the Handbook. However, the Petitioner cites 
no alternative, authoritative sources. 
13 
(b)(6)
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
unique advantage" because it allows marketing specialists to become familiar with their products and 
create "more effective marketing campaigns." We first note that does not assert that 
marketing specialists who are hired in the industry must have a bachelor's degree in "marketing or a 
related area." Rather, states only that many small jewelers hire such individuals. The 
regulation, however, uses the word "requirement." Furthermore, does not indicate whether 
his usage of the word "many" signifies even a majority. Given these deficiencies, especially when 
considered in light of DOL's findings made in the Handbook regarding this occupational category, we 
find that letter does not satisfy this criterion. 
The record of proceedings contains three letters from companies that the Petitioner claims conduct 
business within its industry. However, none of these letters provide any insight into how these three 
companies are also "similar" to the Petitioner, as required by the regulation. 
These three letters contain additional deficiencies. For example, does not discuss the 
educational requirements of a marketing analyst position in the Petitioner's industry. While the letters 
from indicate that they have marketing specialists on their staff with a 
bachelor's degree in marketing or another related field, neither author supports their assertions with 
objective documentary evidence. Again, going on record without supporting documentary evidence is 
not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Sojjici, 
22 I&N Dec. at 165. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the duties of the positions discussed in 
these letters parallel those of the proffered position. 
Therefore, these letters are insufficient to demonstrate that of a bachelor's or higher degree in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common for positions that are identifiable as being (1) in the 
Petitioner's industry, (2) parallel to the proffered position, and also (3) located in organizations that 
are similar to the Petitioner. 
We will next address the job advertisements submitted by the Petitioner. However, upon review of 
the documents, we find that the Petitioner's reliance on the job advertisements is also misplaced. 
For the Petitioner to establish that an organization operating 
within its industry is also "similar" 
to it, 
it must demonstrate that the Petitioner and the referenced organization share the same general 
characteristics. Without such evidence, documentation submitted by a petitioner is generally outside 
the scope of consideration for this criterion, which encompasses only organizations that are similar 
to the petitioner. When determining whether the Petitioner and the advertising organization share 
the same general characteristics, such factors may include information regarding the nature or type 
of organization, and, when pertinent, the particular scope of operations, as well as the level of 
revenue and staffing (to list just a few elements that may be considered). It is not sufficient for the 
Petitioner to claim that an organization is similar and in the same industry without providing a 
legitimate basis for such an assertion. 
While some of the advertisements appear to be from jewelry companies, the Petitioner did not state 
what characteristics the Petitioner shares with these companies beyond conducting business in the 
14 
(b)(6)
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
same industry. For example, the Petitioner stated that it is a small business employing four 
employees, and it provided no information regarding its gross or net income. Some of the 
advertisements, however, are from branded companies operating on a global scale, such as 
and The Petitioner also submitted advertisements from staffing 
companies that provide little or no information about their clients. The record of proceeding also 
includes an advertisement from the Without further information, the 
advertisements do not appear to involve organizations that operate in the Petitioner's industry and 
that are similar to the Petitioner, and the Petitioner has not provided any probative evidence to 
suggest otherwise. 
Moreover, some of the advertised positions either require a bachelor's degree in business 
administration or do not specify any degree specialty at all. As discussed above, a requirement of a 
general degree such as business administration, without more, will not justify a finding that a 
particular position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. See Royal Siam Corp. v. 
Chertoff, 484 F.3d at 147. More importantly, the Petitioner has not sufficiently established that the 
primary duties and responsibilities of the advertised positions are parallel to those of the proffered 
position. 
As the documentation does not establish that the Petitioner has met this prong of the regulations, 
further analysis regarding the specific information contained in each of the job postings is not 
necessary. That is, as the evidence does not establish that similar organizations in the same industry 
routinely require at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, for parallel 
positions, not every deficit of every job posting has been addressed. 13 
Thus, based upon a complete review of the record, we find that the Petitioner has not established that 
a requirement for at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common for 
positions that are identifiable as being (1) in the petitioner's industry, (2) parallel to the proffered 
position, and also (3) located in organizations that are similar to the petitioner. Thus, for the reasons 
discussed above, the Petitioner has not satisfied the first alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2).
14 
13 It must be noted that even if all of the job postings indicated that a requirement of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations (which they do not), the Petitioner 
does not demonstrate what statistically valid inferences, if any, can be drawn from the advertisements with regard to 
determining the common educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations. See 
generally Earl Babbie, The Practice of Social Research 186-228 (1995). Moreover, given that there is no indication that 
the advertisements were randomly selected, the validity of any such inferences could not be accurately determined even 
if the sampling unit were sufficiently large. See id. at 195-196 (explaining that "[r]andom selection is the key to [the] 
process [of probability sampling]" and that "random selection offers access to the body of probability theory, which 
provides the basis for estimates ofpopulation parameters and estimates of error"). 
14 In discussing this prong of the regulation in its brief, the Petitioner claims that "many companies similar in size to the 
Petitioner have [a] full-time Marketing Specialist on staff" That statement, however, misstates the relevant inquiry. The 
question at hand is not whether similar companies employ similar individuals. Again, the question is whether the 
Petitioner has established by a preponderance of the evidence that a requirement for at least a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common for positions that are identifiable as being (I) in the petitioner's industry, 
15 
Matter~~ D-D-, LLC 
The particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by 
an individual with a baccalaureate or higher degree in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent 
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. 
In the instant case, the Petitioner did not sufficiently develop relative complexity or uniqueness as an 
aspect of the proffered position of marketing specialist. Specifically, the record does not 
demonstrate how the marketing- specialist position described requires 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 Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary is well qualified for the position, and references her 
qualifications. However, the test to establish a position as a specialty occupation is not the education 
or experience of a proposed beneficiary, but .whether the position itself requires at least a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. The Petitioner has not satisfied the second 
alternative prong of8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
The employer normally requires a baccalaureate or higher degree in a 
spectfic specialty, or its equivalent, for the position 
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 
this end, we review the petitioner's past recruiting and hiring practices, as well as information 
regarding employees who previously held the position, and any other documentation submitted by a 
petitioner in support of this criterion of the regulations. 
To merit approval of the petition under this criterion, the record must establish that a petitioner's 
imposition of a degree requirement is not merely a matter of preference for high-caliber candidates 
but is necessitated by performance requirements of the position. While a petitioner may assert that a 
proffered position requires a specific degree, that statement alone without corroborating evidence 
cannot establish the position as a specialty occupation. Were USCIS limited solely to reviewing a 
petitioner's claimed self-imposed requirements, then any individual with a bachelor's degree could 
be brought to the United States to perform any occupation as long as the petitioner artificially 
created a token degree requirement, whereby all individuals employed in a particular position 
possessed a baccalaureate or higher degree in the specific specialty, or its equivalent. See Defensor 
v. Meissner, 201 F.3d at 388. 
(2) parallel to the proffered position, and also (3) located in organizations that are similar to the petitioner. 
16 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
To satisfy this criterion, the evidence of record must show that the specific performance 
requirements of the position generated the recruiting and hiring history. A petitioner's perfunctory 
declaration of a particular educational requirement will not mask the fact that the position is not a 
specialty occupation. USCIS must examine the actual employment requirements, and, on the basis 
of that examination, determine whether the position qualifies as a specialty occupation. See 
generally Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F. 3d 384. In this pursuit, the critical element is not the title of 
the position, or the fact that an employer has routinely insisted on certain educational standards, but 
whether performance of the position actually requires the theoretical and practical application of a 
body of highly specialized knowledge, and the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in the 
specific specialty as the minimum for entry into the occupation as required by the Act. 
The Petitioner concedes that this is a newly-created position. As such, the record of proceeding does 
not contain a hiring history for us to examine. Therefore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that it 
normally requires at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent for the 
proffered position, it does not satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3). 
The nature of the spectfic 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 in a spectfic specialty, or its equivalent 
Next, we find that the evidence of record does not satisfy the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)( 4), which requires the Petitioner to establish that the nature of the proffered 
position's 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 the specific specialty or its 
equivalent. 
Again, relative specialization and complexity have not been sufficiently developed by the Petitioner 
as an aspect of the proffered position's duties. In other words, the proposed duties have not been 
described with sufficient specificity to show that their nature is more specialized and complex than 
marketing 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. With 
regard to the specific duties of the position proffered here, we find that the record of proceeding 
lacks sufficient, credible evidence establishing that they are so specialized and complex that the 
knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with the attainment of a bachelor's degree 
in a specific specialty, or the equivalent. 
For all of these reasons, the evidence in the record of proceeding does not establish that the proposed 
duties meet the specialization and complexity threshold at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). 
1'7 
Matter of D-D-, LLC 
For the reasons related in the preceding discussion, the Petitioner has not established that it has 
satisfied any of the criteria at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) and, therefore, it cannot be found that 
the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. The appeal will be dismissed. 15 
II. CONCLUSION AND ORDER 
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; Matter ofOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 
(BIA 2013). Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter ofD-D-, LLC, ID# 13864 (AAO Oct. 14, 2015) 
15 As the grounds discussed above are dispositive of the Petitioner's eligibility for the benefit sought in this matter, we 
will not address and will instead reserve our determination on the additional issues and deficiencies that we observe in 
the record of proceeding with regard to the approval of the H-1 8 petition. 
18