dismissed H-1B Case: Legal Research

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF L- LLC 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JUNE L 2016 
PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner. a legal research company. seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a ··director of 
overseas operations"" 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)(15)(H)(i)(b). The H-1B program allows a U.S. employer to temporarily employ a 
qualified foreign worker in a position that requires both (a) the theoretical and practical application 
of a body ofhighly 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, Vermont Service Center. denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
Petitioner did not establish that the proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation in 
accordance with the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeaL the Petitioner submits additional evidence and 
asserts that the Director erred by finding that the proffered position is not a specialty occupation. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
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 L- LLC 
(1) A baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry into the particular position: 
(2) The degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among 
similar organizations or. in the alternative. an employer may show that its 
particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an 
individual with a degree: 
(3) The employer normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the position: or 
( .J) 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). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has consistently 
interpreted 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 proposed 
position. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Cherf(?{j; 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 the H-1 B petition. the Petitioner described itself as a '·legal publisher and developer of high 
definition search and knowledge discovery sothvare:' and indicated that it seeks to employ the 
Beneficiary as its ··director of overseas operations... In the initial letter of support. the Petitioner 
provided a description of the job duties for the proffered position. \vhich it termed a ··yp of overseas 
operations'· position, as follows (verbatim): 
Coordination and Supervision Duties: 
• Understand the requirements of USA customers and accordingly coordinate 
between USA managers at [the Petitioner] and Indian Managers at [Petitioner's 
offshore operations]. 
• Work in a collaborative environment and to manage multiple task assignments. 
• Monitor excising software tools and provide solution for improvement. 
• Troubleshoot and create action plan for quick and efTective solutions for any 
problems 
• Create a positive, encouraging, consistent. and effective \York environment 
between staff and senior team leaders. 
• Work with programming department in developing new software. 
• Work with customer support to find customer issues. as well take their input for 
new requirements. 
2 
Matter<?( L- LLC 
• Review the work done by India team before giving it for further process to USA 
team. 
• Oversee performance and quality standards before deploying on site for customer 
use. 
• Identify process improvement opportunities to drive operations efficiently. 
• Monitor staff performance and the quality of work produced by Indian team 
• Manage staffing resources to accommodate workflow changes and for new 
assignments. 
• Develop team training plan. 
• Provide regular updates to top managements. 
Financial Duties: 
• Review financial reports and data. 
• Use financial reports to improve profitability. 
• Communicate with new promising companies for new opportunities. 
• Prepare and control operational budgets. 
Managerial Duties: 
• Communicate with superiors about requirements related to staff and work related 
changes and improvements. 
• Get their approvals for unexpected expenses. 
• Discuss new strategies for marketing. 
According to the Petitioner's support letter. the position requires at least a bachelor·s degree or its 
academic equivalent. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner provided the following duties 
for the proffered position along with the percentage of time allocated to the tasks. as summarized 
below: 
• 25% of Work Duties: Understand the requirements of U.S. customers and 
accordingly coordinate between U.S. and Indian managers. Provide regular updates 
to top management. 
• 20% of Work Duties: Work in a collaborative environment and manage multiple 
task assignments. including overseeing the development of the Prison Casemaker 
system and the backlogged coursebook sections for various clients. 
• 10% of Work Duties: Troubleshoot and create action plan for quick and effective 
solutions for any problems. 
• 10% of Work Duties: Create a positive, encouraging. consistent. and etlective work 
environment between staff and senior team leaders. 
• 15% of Work Duties: Work with programming department in developing new 
software. 
3 
Matter (?f L- LLC 
• 5% of Work Duties: Work with customer support to find customer issues, and 
get customer input for new requirements. 
• 10% of Work Duties: Review the work done by India team before giving it for 
further process to USA team. 
• 5% of Work Duties: Miscellaneous and financial duties, such as reviewing 
financial reports and preparing operational budgets. 
The Petitioner indicated in its RFE response that the proffered position normally reqUires a 
bachelor's degree in business. as well as the .. theoretical knowledge and understanding of 
management principles and strategies found in International Business." 
On appeal, the Petitioner states that the desired qualification for the proffered position is a bachelor's 
degree in library science --and at least a year of law school." 
Ill. ANALYSIS 
Upon review of the record in its totality and for the reasons set out below, we determine that the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated that the proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation. 
Specifically, the record does not establish that the job duties require an educational background. or 
its equivalent, commensurate with a specialty occupation. 1 
As an initial matter, the Petitioner has not consistently identified the mm1mum educational 
background and requirements for the profTered position. For instance. the Petitioner stated in its 
cover letter that the protTered position requires at least a bachelor's degree or its academic 
equivalent, without further specifying that the bachelor's degree must be from any particular tield(s) 
of study or that additional experience is required. In response to the Director's RFE. the Petitioner 
indicated that the proffered position requires a degree in business or international business. 
Moreover, the Petitioner's RFE response referred to an opinion letter concluding that the proffered 
position requires at least a bachelor"s degree in business administration or a related area. On appeaL 
the Petitioner now indicates that the position requires a bachelor's degree in library science plus 
··significant"" and --extensive" legal training that must be gained from ··at least a year of law school." 
The Petitioner has not explained its inconsistent requirements and submitted objective evidence 
pointing to where the truth lies? 
.. [IJt is incumbent upon the petitioner to resolve the inconsistencies by independent objective 
evidence.'· Malter (?f Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591 (BIA 1988). Any attempt to explain or reconcile 
1 The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H-1 8 petition. including evidence regarding the proffered 
position and its business operations. While we may not discuss every document submitted. we have reviewed and 
considered each one. 
2 The Petitioner also has not explained why it refers to the proffered position as both a ··director" and '"vice president'" of 
overseas operations. 
4 
Afatter of L- LLC 
such inconsistencies will not suffice unless the petitioner submits competent objective evidence 
pointing to where the truth lies. !d. at 591-92. In addition, subsequent to tiling the petition. the 
Petitioner cannot offer a new position to the Beneficiary. or materially change a position's title. 
associated job responsibilities, or minimum entry requirements. The Petitioner must establish that 
the position offered to the Beneficiary when the petition was tiled merits classification for the 
benefit sought. See Matter (~{Michelin Tire Corp .• 17 I&N Dec. 248. 249 (Reg'! Comm 'r 1978). A 
petitioner may not make material changes to a petition in an efTort to make a deficient petition 
conform to USC IS requirements. See Matter (?l Izummi. 22 I&N Dec. 169. I 76 (Assoc. Comm 'r 
1998). 
If the Petitioner's minimum requirement for entry into the protlered position includes a general 
bachelor's degree (as initially asserted) or a general-purpose business or business administration 
degree (as alternatively asserted in the RFE response). then these requirements are inadequate to 
establish that the proposed position qualities as a specialty occupation. A petitioner must 
demonstrate that the protlered position requires a precise and specific course of study that relates 
directly and closely to the position in question. There must be a close correlation between the 
required specialized studies and the position; thus, the mere requirement of a general degree, without 
further specification, does not establish the position as a specialty occupation. Cf A1atter oj'/vfichael 
Hertz Assocs .. 19 I&N Dec. 558. 560 (Comm'r 1988) ("The mere requirement of a college degree 
for the sake of general education, or to obtain what an employer perceives to be a higher caliber 
employee. also does not establish eligibility."). While a general-purpose bachelor's degree may be a 
legitimate prerequisite tor 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. Royal 
Siam Corp. v. Cherf(~tf~ 484 F.3d at 147.3 
Nevertheless. for the purpose of perfonning a comprehensive analysis of whether the proffered 
position qualities as a specialty occupation, we will analyze the criteria at 8 C .F .R. 
§ 2 I 4.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A). 4 
A. First Criterion 
We turn first to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(J), which requires that a baccalaureate 
or higher degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent. is normally the minimum requirement tor 
entry into the particular position. To inform this inquiry. we recognize the U.S. Department of Labor's 
' A general degree requirement does not necessarily preclude a proffered position from qualit)dng as a specialty 
occupation. For example, an entry requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in business administration with a 
concentration in a specific field, or a bachelor"s or higher degree in business administration combined with relevant 
education. training. and/or experience may, in certain instances, qualify the proffered position as a specialty 
occupation. In either case. it must be demonstrated that the entry requirement is equivalent to a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proffered position. Sl!e Royal Siam Corp. r. C 'hahd/: 484 F.3d 
at 147. 
~Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap, we will address each of the criteria individually. 
5 
(b)(6)
Malter (?f L- LLC 
(DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) as an authoritative source on the duties and 
educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses.5 
On the labor condition application (LCA) submitted to support the H-1 B petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the occupational category ··General and Operations 
Managers·· corresponding to Standard Occupational Classification code 11-1021. This occupational 
classification is addressed in the Handbook chapter on "Top Executives:· The Handbook reports that 
education and training requirements for these positions "vary widely by position and industry." 
Although the Handbook emphasizes that top executives require ··a considerable amount of work 
experience'' and states that '·[t]op executives who are promoted from lower level positions may be 
able to substitute experience for education to move up in the company," the Handbook does not 
specify the amount and type of work experience required. 
Moreover, the Handbook's statement that "[m]any top executives have a bachelor's or master' s 
degree in business administration" is inadequate to establish the position as a specialt y occup ation . 
As previously discussed , while 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 qualities for classification as a 
specialty occupation. Royal Siam Corp. v. C'hert<dl 484 F.3d at 147. Therefore, the Handbook· .,. 
recognition that a general, non-specialty degree in business administration is also sufficient for entry 
into the occupation strongly suggests that a bachelor's degree in a .\pec[fic .\pecialty is not normally 
the minimum requirement for entry into this occupation. 
In addition, the Petitioner submitted an opinion letter from the Associate Dean of Academic Affairs 
at the We have reviewed the opinion letter in its 
entirety. However , we find that the letter is not persuasive in establishing the proffered position as a 
specialty occupation position. 
In his letter, asserts that the proffered position merits someone with a '·Bachelor's 
degree in Business Administration. or a related area, or the equivalent." As previously stated, 
however, a requirement of a general-purpose bachelor's degree in business administration will not 
justify a finding that a particular position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. ld. 
Furthermore, does not sufficiently explain the factual bases for his conclu sions. For 
instance. states that he has had the "opportunity over the years to become familiar 
with the qualifications required to attain the position of VP of Overseas Operations and similar 
5 All of our references are to the 2016-17 edition of the Handbook, available at http: //www.bls.gov/ooh/. We do not. 
however, maintain that the Handbook is the exclusive source of relevant information . That is, the occupational cate gory 
desi gnated by the Petitioner is considered as an aspect in establishing the general tasks and responsibilities of a proffered 
position, and USCIS regul arly reviews the Handbook on the duties and educational requirem ents of the wide variety of 
occupations that it addre sses. To satisf y the tirst criterion. however. the burden of proof remain s on the Petition er to 
submit sufficient evidence to support a finding that its particular position would nom1ally have a minimum . specialty 
degree requirement, or its equivalent, for entry . 
6 
(b)(6)
l'.latter of L- LLC 
professional positions.'' He also states that it is .. typical for a leading provider of legal research 
software and legal content whose business operations are conducted in ditTerent countries to hire a 
VP of Overseas Operations or someone in a similar professional position." However, he docs not 
explain the source of his opportunities and familiarity with companies like the Petitioner that are in 
the legal research business with otlshore operations. Instead. he vaguely references his position as 
an associate dean of academic affairs at the as the 
source of his familiarity with the subject matter. There is also no indication that 
possesses any knowledge of the Petitioner's proffered position and operations beyond the limited 
information provided by the Petitioner in support of the instant petition. opmwn 
does not relate his conclusion to specific. concrete aspects of this Petitioner's business operations to 
demonstrate a sound factual basis for the conclusion about the educational 
requirements for the 
particular position here at issue. 
We observe that does not indicate whether he considered. or was even aware ot: the 
Petitioner's statements that the profTered position requires someone with a library science degree. at 
least one year of Jaw school, and significant legal training. While lists several classes 
taught in a typical business administration curriculum, he does not list classes that would appear to 
provide the type of library science and legal training the Petitioner indicates is necessary for the 
proffered position. We consider this a significant omission. in that it suggests an incomplete review 
of the position in question and a faulty factual basis for the author's ultimate conclusion regarding 
the educational requirements of the position upon which he opines. Without more, the Petitioner has 
not demonstrated that possesses the requisite information necessary to adequately 
assess the nature and the normal requirements for the proffered position. 
Accordingly. we find that the opinion letter rendered by does not establish the 
proffered position as a specialty occupation under the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(/), 
or any other criterion. For etliciency's sake, we incorporate our analysis regarding 
letter into our discussion of the other criteria. We may, in our discretion. use as advisory opinion 
statements submitted as expert testimony. However, where an opinion is not in accord with other 
information or is in any way questionable. we are not required to accept or may give less weight to 
that evidence. Maller l~lCaron International. 19 I&N Dec. 791 (Comm'r 1988). 
Thus. the Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A)(/ ). 
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[.r 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong 
contemplates common industry practice, while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the 
Petitioner's specific position. 
Matter <?f L- LLC 
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 organizations. 
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 \\hether 
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. S'ava, 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 authoritative source, reports a requirement for at least a bachelor"s degree in 
a specific specialty, or its equivalent. We incorporate by reference the previous discussion on the 
matter. Also. there are no submissions from the industry"s professional association indicating that it 
has made a degree a minimum entry requirement. Furthennore, the Petitioner did not submit any 
letters or affidavits from similar firms or individuals in the Petitioner"s industry attesting that such 
firms .. routinely employ and recruit only degreed individuals." Thus, 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 \Vith at least a bachelor"s degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. 
The Petitioner has not sufficiently developed relative complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the 
proffered position. Here. the Petitioner has explained its need for the proffered position to address 
the ··real world management crisis" it is facing with its Indian operations. The Petitioner has also 
explained the difficulties generally faced by companies in the context of managing offshore 
technical staff While these aspects demonstrate the Petitioner"s legitimate need for the proffered 
position, they nevertheless do not demonstrate why the proffered position is so unique or complex 
such that it can be performed only by an individual with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty, or its equivalent. 
In its appeal briet: the Petitioner highlights the need for "a qualified individual with the knowledge, 
experience and understanding necessary to take on the detailed duties of management.·· The 
Petitioner also lists several classes taught in a typical business administration cuniculum. Again. 
however, a degree in business administration, without further specification. is not considered a 
degree in a specific specialty. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Cher/(?ff; 484 F.3d at 147. Additionally. the 
8 
Matter of L- LLC 
Petitioner has not demonstrated how an otherwise unspecified degree in business administration 
would provide the knowledge necessary to perform some of the proffered duties. For example. the 
Petitioner states that the Beneficiary's .. key duties .. include .. locating and obtaining legal and related 
data needed for the [Petitioner"s] legal research service .. and .. managing a team of lawyers in India." 
The Petitioner further states that these duties require ··significant knowledge of legal concepts" and 
''significant legal training:' The Petitioner has not. however, identified any classes typically 
required in a business administration curriculum that would provide the type of legal training the 
Petitioner indicates is necessary for the proffered position. 
Also in its appeal brief~ the Petitioner highlights the fact that .. the VP Overseas Operations is 
managing individuals with bachelors' degrees." The Petitioner supplements its appeal with the 
resumes ofthe team leaders in India who would report to the Beneficiary. The resumes indicate that 
these individuals possess degrees in a wide range of fields, including computer science, commerce. 
and law.
6 
The Petitioner has not sut1iciently explained hO\v the varied degrees of the Beneficiary's 
subordinates demonstrate that the proffered position can be performed only by an individual with at 
least a bachelor's degree in a .\pec!fic specialty. or its equivalent. 7 
Thus. 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. 
Evidence provided in support of this criterion may include. but is not limited to. documentation 
regarding the Petitioner's past recruiting and hiring practices. as well as information regarding 
employees who previously held the position. x 
6 
The Petitioner does not submit evidence to corroborate these individuals' claimed degrees or their U.S. degree 
equivalencies. 
7 In general, provided the specialties are closely related. e.g., computer science and information technology. degrees in 
more than one specialty would be recognized as satisfying the ""degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent)"" 
requirement of section 214(i)( I )(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 degrees in disparate fields. such as computer 
science and law. would not meet the statutory requirement that the degree be ""in the specific specialty (or its 
equivalent),'' unless the Petitioner establishes how each tield 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)( I )(B) of the Act (emphasis added). The Petitioner has not adequately done so here. 
x To merit approval of the petition under this criterion, the record must also establish that a petitioner's imposition of a 
degree requirement is not 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 the 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 created a token degree 
9 
Matter of L- LLC 
The Petitioner indicated that the position is a new position, and that the company has not previously 
hired for this position. The record of proceedings thus does not satisfy 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. 
Under this criterion. the Petitioner again focuses on its management issues with otTshore staff and its 
need to address those issues. For the same reasons we discussed under the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A)(2), however, we find that the Petitioner has not sutliciently developed relative 
complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the proffered position. We hereby incorporate our previous 
discussion on the matter. 
We acknowledge the Petitioner's claims that the Beneficiary is well qualified for the posltwn. 
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 demonstrated in the record that its 
proffered position is one with duties sufficiently specialized and complex so as to require an 
individual with a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. The 
Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(..f). 
IV. CONCLUSION 
Because the Petitioner has not satisfied one of the 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. The burden is on the 
Petitioner to show eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act. 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1361; Matter o(Otiende. 26 I&N Dec. 127. 128 (BIA 2013). Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as lvfatter o/L- LLC, ID# 16787 (AAO June L 2016) 
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. Afeissner. 20 I F.3d at 388. 
10