dismissed H-1B Case: Manufacturing

MATTER OF R-G-B- LLC 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: NOV. 29,2016 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a steel metal building manufacturer, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a 
"market analyst" under the H-1 B nonimmigrant classification tor specialty occupations. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). 
The H-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 D~irector concluded that the 
Petitioner did not establish that the proffered position qualifies 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 a brief and new 
evidence, and asserts that the Director's decision was erroneous. 
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.P.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 R-G-B- 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 
( 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). 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. 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"); Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). 
II. PROFFERED POSITION 
In the initial letter of support, the Petitioner provided a general description of the job duties for the 
proffered market analyst position. In response to the Director's request for evidence, the Petitioner 
expanded upon the duties of the proffered position as follows: 
1. (30%)- Market Intelligence on Competitors: Gather data on competitors and analyze 
their prices, sales, and marketing methods. Maintain a database with an assessment 
of competitor strengths and weaknesses. Periodically perform extensive competitor 
profiles. Consolidate information, analyses and summarize findings for review and 
discussion with management; 
2. (30%) Forecast and Analyze Market and Sales Trends: Forecast and track marketing 
and sales trends by analyzing collected data. Summarize findings for review and 
discussion with the sales team; 
3. (15%) Issue Reports: Prepare reports for managers by illustrating data graphically 
and translating complex findings into written text; 
4. (1 0%) Market Intelligence on Potential Market Factors: Analyze and identify 
potential market factors affecting product demand. Consolidate information, analyses 
and summarize findings for review and discussion with sales team; 
5. (1 0%) Weekly Meetings: Assist and participate in the preparation of weekly strategy 
meetings. Provide information on competitors, potential markets and sales trends at 
the meetings; and 
2 
Matter of R-G-B- LLC 
6. (5%) Share Findings with Majority Chinese Investors: Translate summaries of key 
market research findings into Mandarin Chinese and share the summaries with [the 
Petitioner's] majority Chinese investors. 
According to the Petitioner, the proffered position requires at least a bachelor's degree in business 
administration, marketing, economics, or a related field. 
III. ANALYSIS 
Upon review of the record in its totality and for the reasons set out below, we determine that the 
record does not establish that the proffered position satisfies any of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) in order to qualify as a specialty occupation. 1 
As stated above, USCIS 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 proposed position. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d at 147; Dej'ensor v. 
Meissner, 201 F.3d at 387. Here, the Petitioner's minimum educational requirement for the 
proffered position includes a general-purpose bachelor's degree in business administration. See 
Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d at 147 (recognizing a business administration degree as a 
"general-purpose" degree). However, a requirement of a general-purpose bachelor's degree, without 
more, will not justify a finding that a particular position qualifies for classification as a specialty 
occupation. !d. 
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. There must be a close correlation 
between the required specialized studies and the position; thus, the mere requirement of a general or 
general-purpose degree, without further specification, does not establish the position as a specialty 
occupation. Id; cf Matter of Michael 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."). On the 
basis of the proffered position's educational requirement alone, we cannot find that the proffered 
position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
We also cannot find that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation, as the Petitioner 
has not demonstrated that the proffered positiOn satisfies any of the criteria at 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) for the reasons set out below? 
1 The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H-1 B petition, including evidence regarding the proffered 
position and its business operations. While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and 
considered each one. 
2 Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap, we will address each of the criteria individually. 
3 
Matter of R-G-B- LLC 
A. First Criterion 
We turn firstto 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 
Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) as an authoritative source on the duties and educational 
requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses.3 
On the labor condition application (LCA)4 submitted in support of the H-1B petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the standard occupational classification code and title 
13-1161, "Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists," at a Level I wage rate.5 
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. "6 
The Handbook does not indicate that a bachelor's degree in a spec?fic specialty, or the equivalent, is 
normally required for entry into this occupation. That is, 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, 
3 All of our references are to the 2016-2017 edition of the Handbook, which may be accessed at the Internet ~ite 
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 USC IS regularly reviews 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 particular position 
would normally have a minimum, specialty degree requirement, or its equivalent, for entry. 
4 The Petitioner is required to submit a certified LCA to USCIS to demonstrate that it will pay an H-1 B worker the 
higher of either the prevailing wage for the occupational classification in the "area of employment" or the actual wage 
paid by the employer to other employees with similar experience and qualifications who are performing the same 
services. See Matter ofSimeio Solutions, LLC, 26 I&N Dec. 542, 545-546 (AAO 20 15). 
5 We will. consider the Petitioner's classification of the proffered position at a Level I wage (the lowest of four assignable 
wage levels) in our analysis of the position. The "Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance" issued by the DOL 
provides a description of the wage levels. A Level I wage rate is generally appropriate for positions for which the 
Petitioner expects the Beneficiary to have a basic understanding of the occupation. This wage rate indicates: (I) that the 
Beneficiary will be expected to perform routine tasks that require limited, if any, exercise of judgment; (2) that he will be 
closely supervised and his work closely monitored and reviewed for accuracy; and (3) that he will receive specific 
instructions on required tasks and expected results. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage 
Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http://flcdatacenter.com/download/NPWHC_Guidance_Revised_ll_2009.pdf. A prevailing wage determination starts 
with an entry level wage and progresses to a higher wage level after considering the experience, education, and skill 
requirements ofthe Petitioner's job opportunity. !d. A Level I wage should be considered for research fellows, workers 
in training, or internships. !d. 
6 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 Nov. 29, 20 16). 
4 
Matter of R-G-B- LLC 
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, 
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 ofthese different specialties. Section 214(i)(l)(b) of the Act (emphasis added). 7 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 analysts 
occupation. This statement is consistent with the Petitioner's educational requirement for the 
proffered position, which includes a bachelor's degree in business administration. But 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 Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d at 147; cf Matter ofMichael 
Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. at 560. 
The Petitioner explains that the Handbook's description "is not restricted to any industry meaning 
virtually every industry is covered. Thus, the federal government itself, via the [Handbook], 
acknowledges that most market research analysts typically need a bachelor's degree in market 
research or a related field." It appears the Petitioner is requesting us to focus only on certain 
statements in the Handbook (i.e., that "market research analysts typically need a bachelor's degree in 
or related to market research"), while disregarding other statements (i.e., that "[ m ]any have degrees 
in fields such as statistics, math, and computer science. Others have backgrounds in business 
administration, the social sciences, or communications."). 
The Petitioner's assertions are not persuasive. Under the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l), we consider all of the Handbook"s contents about market research analysts 
7 Whether read with the statutory "the" or the regulatory "a," both readings denote a singular "specialty." Section 
214(i)(I)(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 
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. 
5 
Matter of R-G-B- LLC 
as a whole, not just the parts that are favorable to the Petitioner. Moreover, by implying that the 
Handbook's statements regarding degrees in disparate fields and general-purpose degrees apply only 
to certain industries, the Petitioner is essentially acknowledging that requirements for market 
research analysts vary by industry. Thus, the Petitioner is essentially acknowledging that market 
research analyst positions as an overall occupational category do not constitute a specialty 
occupation. 
The Petitioner submits two articles about market research analyst positions. One article states that 
"[b]ecoming a market research analyst requires at least a bachelor's degree, but you could choose 
from a range of majors." Another article states that "[ m ]ost entry-level market research positions 
require a bachelor's degree in marketing, market research or a related field of study. Students who 
pursue a bachelor's degree in mathematics, statistics, or computer science will also be prepared for a 
career in market research and analysis." These articles are consistent with the Handbook, in that 
they indicate that market research analyst positions can be performed by individuals with degrees in 
various fields. We find that these articles -as well as the Handbook- do not support the conclusion 
that a bachelor's degree in a spec(fic specialty, or the equivalent, is normally required for entry into 
this occupation. 
The Petitioner also relies on the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) Summary Report for 
the "Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists" occupational classification (a copy of 
which the Petitioner submitted). In particular, the Petitioner highlights that 71% of respondents 
possess a bachelor's degree, 21% possess a master's degree, and 4% possess a post-baccalaureate 
certificate (accounting for 96% of respondents). 
However, this information in O*NET does not establish that the proffered position satisfies the 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l), either. Specifically, this statistical information makes 
no mention of the specific field of study from which the degrees possessed by the respondents come. 
In other words, although O*NET indicates that most (but not all) of respondents possess at least a 
bachelor's degree, it does not indicate whether these bachelor's degrees come from a spec(fic 
specialty, and if so, which specific specialty. 8 
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. The Petitioner has not satisfied 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). 
8 On appeal, the Petitioner states that "while the O*NET OnLine printout does not indicate in what major those degrees 
were in, based on information provided by the [Handbook] ... it is probable that those degrees were in business 
administration, the social sciences, or communications." Even if the Petitioner's assumption were true, we reiterate our 
prior discussion regarding the inadequacy of general-purpose degrees, such as degrees in business administration or the 
social sciences. 
6 
(b)(6)
Matter of R-G-B- LLC 
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 
contemplates 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 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 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)(quotingHird/BlakerCorp. v. Sava. 712F. 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 another 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. 
The Petitioner submitted several vacancy announcements under the first prong of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). However, the Petitioner has not submitted sufficient evidence to establish 
that the advertising companies are in the Petitioner's industry (the building construction industry). 
Although the advertisements do not contain detailed information about the posting organizations, 
based on the brief descriptions contained therein, many of them do not appear relevant to the 
Petitioner's industry, such as the advertisements from 
(a software development company), and (an 
education technology 
company). 
For those organizations that appear to be in the Petitioner's industry, such as 
and the 
Petitioner has not submitted sufficient evidence to establish that these organizations are similar to the 
Petitioner. For the Petitioner to establish that an organization is similar, it must demonstrate that it 
shares the same general characteristics with the advertising organization (as can be demonstrated by 
factors such as the nature or type of organization, the particu~ar 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 
(b)(6)
Matter of R-G-B-LLC 
for the Petitioner to claim that an organization is similar without providing a legitimate basis for 
such an assertion. A petitioner's unsupported statements are of very limited weight and normally 
will be insufficient to carry its burden of proof. Matter (~f So.ffici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm 'r 
1998) (citing Matter ofTreasure Craft ~[Cal., 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg'l Comm'r 1972)); see also 
Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). 
The record is insufficient to establish that 
and the other advertising organizations are 
similar to the Petitioner. Here, the Petitioner described itself on the H-1 B petition as a steel building 
manufacturer with 300 employees and an approximate gross annual income of $60,973,782.00 and 
net annual income of $470,081.00. In contrast, is described as "the largest 
homebuilder in the U.S." and "a publicly traded company ... [that] also provides mortgage 
financing and title services for homebuyers through its mortgage and title subsidiaries." 
is described as a global manufacturer and marketer of not only building products and related 
chemicals, but also, of tissue, paper-based packaging, office products, cellulose, specialty fibers, 
non-woven fabrics. The advertisements by and 
simply do not provide enough information about these companies' general 
characteristics in order for us to conduct a legitimate comparison. Without such evidence, we cannot 
determine the relevance of these advertisements under this prong of the criterion, which 
encompasses only organizations that are similar to the Petitioner and in the Petitioner's industry. 
We also observe that several of the advertisements are not for parallel positions. For example, the 
advertisement from states a requirement of a bachelor's 
degree and at least 10 years of experience in a "multi-national manufacturing company." The 
advertisement from states a requirement of a bachelor's degree and a 
preference for up to 10 years of experience and knowledge "of the construction industry (mining, 
asphalt, ready-mix concrete)." In comparison, the Petitioner designated the proffered position as a 
Level I position on the submitted LCA. The position's Level I wage rate indicates that the proffered 
position is an entry-level position compared to other positions within the occupation. Thus, the 
proffered position does not appear parallel to the other advertised positions which require or prefer 
significantly more industry experience and knowledge. 
For all of the above reasons, the Petitioner has not satisfied the first alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 9 
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. 
9 Because of these fundamental deficiencies, we will not individually address each of the submitted advertisements. 
Q 
Matter of R-G-B- LLC 
We reviewed the Petitioner's statements regarding the proffered position; however, the record does 
not sufficiently develop relative complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the proffered position. 
Here, the Petitioner states: 
The complexity of the market analyst position stems from the need of the analyst to 
be able to efficiently gather information on market and sales trends, and competitors' 
pricing and market methodologies; (2) timely analyze and consolidate the most 
important information; (3) prepare detailed reports describing in writing (and with 
graphs and charts) the most important information; and ( 4) participate in meetings 
with management and the sales team to discuss the aforementioned reports and 
market research findings. 
The Petitioner's statements regarding the position's claimed complexity do no more than summarize 
the typical job duties of market research analysts as an occupational category. O*NET's Details 
Report for the "Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists" occupational classification 
lists the typical job duties of this occupation, as follows: 10 
• Prepare reports of findings, illustrating data graphically and translating complex 
findings into written text 
• Seek and provide information to help companies determine their position in the 
marketplace 
• Gather data on competitors and analyze their prices, sales, and method of marketing 
and distribution 
• 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, or arrange to obtain existing data 
• 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 
The job duties listed in O*NET mirror the Petitioner's descriptions of the proffered position and its 
associated job duties. In fact, several of the proffered job duties - such as "[g]ather data on 
competitors and analyze their prices, sales, and marketing methods," "[f]orecast and track marketing 
and sales trends by analyzing collected data" and "[p ]repare reports for managers by illustrating data 
10 O*NET Details Report for "Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists,'' 
http://www.onetonline.org/linkldetails/13-1161.00 (last visited Nov. 29, 2016). 
9 
(b)(6)
Matter of R-G-B- LLC 
graphically and translating complex findings into written text"- are virtually identical to those listed 
in. O*NET. This type of generalized description may be appropriate when defining the range of 
duties that may be performed within an occupational category, but it does not adequately convey the 
substantive nature of the work that the Beneficiary will actually perform within the Petitioner's 
business operations and, thus, the level of complexity (or uniqueness) of his work. 
Further, as was noted above, the LCA submitted in support of the petition is approved for a Level I 
market research analyst position. The Level I wage rate designation indicates that the proffered 
position is an entry-level position compared to others within the occupation, for an employee who 
has only a basic understanding of market research analysis and will be expected to perform only 
routine tasks that require limited, if any, exercise of judgment. 11 This does not support the 
proposition that the proffered position is so complex or unique that it can only be performed by a 
person with a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, especially as the Handbook suggests that 
some market research analyst positions do not require such a degree. 
The Petitioner has not sufficiently established that the proffered position is significantly different 
from other positions in the occupation, such that it refutes the Handbook's information to the effect 
that a spectrum of degrees is acceptable for market analyst positions, including general-purpose 
degrees. In other words, the record lacks sufficiently detailed information to distinguish the 
proffered position as more complex than or unique from positions that can be performed by persons 
without at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. For all of these reasons, 
the Petitioner has not sufficiently 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. 
Under this criterion, the Petitioner asserts that it is a "relatively young company and, to date, has 
only hired 2 market research analysts," namely, and the Beneficiary. The Petitioner 
submitted evidence of bachelor of science degree in economics, with a minor in business 
administration. The Petitioner also submitted evidence of the Beneficiary's bachelor's degree in 
business administration with a major in economics. The Petitioner additionally submitted letters 
from its chairman of the board of managers plus its president/chief operating officer, both attesting 
to the company's "policy that the position ofMarket Analyst can only be performed by an individual 
with 
a degree in Business Administration, Economics, Marketing or a related field." 
11 See U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. 
Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/NPWHC _Guidance_ Revised _II_ 2009.pdf 
10 
(b)(6)
Matter of R-G-B- LLC 
The Petitioner's assertions and evidence regarding its two employees are noted. However, the 
Petitioner has not submitted objective evidence of its recruitment process for these two employees to 
provide a complete picture of the Petitioner's employment practices for this position. The Petitioner 
also has not provided sufficient information about job duties in order for us to determine 
that he is also employed in the proffered position. 11 
Moreover, to merit approval of a petition under this criterion, the record must also 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 the actual performance requirements of the position. The record 
does not establish this. 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 that petitioner 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. 
In this matter, the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated how the duties that collectively 
constitute the proffered position require the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly 
specialized knowledge such that a bachelor's or higher degree in a spec?fic 5pecialty, or its 
equivalent, is required to perform them. For instance, the Petitioner did not submit information 
relevant to a detailed course of study leading to a degree in business administration, economics, or 
marketing, and did not establish how such a curriculum is necessary to perform the duties of the 
proffered position. While the Petitioner stated that the proffered position requires "an individual to 
possess superior analytical, oral and written communications and math skills" and "superior math 
and computer science skills," these overly broad statements are insufficient to support the conclusion 
that a bachelor's or higher degree in one of these fields, or its equivalent, is required to perform the 
position. Again, a petitioner's unsupported statements are of very limited weight and normally will 
be insufficient to carry its burden of proof. Matter of"So.ffici, 22 I&N Dec. at 165; see also Matter of 
Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376. 
Therefore, the Petitioner has not satisfied the third criterion of8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
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. 
12 To determine the nature of a particular job, USCIS does not simply rely on a position's title. Instead, USCIS must 
examine the specific duties of that position. 
II 
Matter of R-G-B- LLC 
We reviewed the Petitioner's statements regarding the proffered position's complexity. For the same 
reasons we discussed under the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2), we find 
that the record does not sufficiently develop relative specialization or complexity as an aspect ofthe 
proffered position. 
We incorporate our previous discu~sion regarding the position's Level I wage rate designation. 13 
We also incorporate our previous discussion regarding the Petitioner's generalized position 
descriptions. Because the record does not adequately describe the job duties the Beneficiary will 
actually perform within the context of the Petitioner's actual business operations, we cannot 
determine that the proffered position requires a specialty occupation's level of knowledge in a 
specific specialty, as the position descriptions do not sufficiently communicate (1) the actual work 
the Beneficiary will perform, (2) the complexity, uniqueness and/or specialization of the tasks, 
and/or (3) the correlation between that work and a need for a particular level education of highly 
specialized knowledge in a specific specialty. The Petitioner has not demonstrated in the record that 
its proffered position is one with duties sufficiently complex and specialized to satisfy 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4) (or any other criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)). 
IV. CONCLUSION 
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 qualifies 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 ofOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 (BIA 2013). Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter ofR-G-B- LLC, ID# 101786 (AAO Nov. 29, 2016) 
13 
The Petitioner's designation of this position as a Level I, entry-level position undermines its claim that the position is 
particularly complex, specialized, or unique compared to other positions within the same occupation. Nevertheless, a 
Level I wage-designation does not preclude a proffered position from classification as a specialty occupation, just as a 
Level IV wage-designation does not definitively establish such a classification. In certain occupations (e.g., doctors or 
lawyers), a Level I, entry-level position would still require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or 
its equivalent, for entry. Similarly, however, a Level IV wage-designation would not reflect that an occupation qualifies 
as a specialty occupation if that higher-level position does not have an entry requirement of at least a bachelor's degree 
in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. That is, a position's wage level designation may be a relevant factor but is not 
itself conclusive evidence that a proffered position meets the requirements of section 214(i)( I) of the Act. 
12