dismissed H-1B Case: Marketing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF I-, LLC 
APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: DEC. 18,2015 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a shipping, retail, and office services business, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a "Marketing Specialist" under the H-1B nonimmigrant classification. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) § 101(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b). 
The Director, Vermont Service Center, revoked the approval of the petition. The matter is now 
before us on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
I. ISSUE 
The issue before us is whether the Director properly revoked the approval of the petition. 1 
II. REVOCATION 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may revoke the approval of an H-1B petition 
pursuant to 8 C.F .R. § 214.2(h)(l1 )(iii), which states the following: 
(A) Grounds for revocation. The director shall send to the petitioner a notice of 
intent to revoke the petition in relevant part if he or she finds that: 
(I) The beneficiary is no longer employed by the petitioner in the capacity 
specified in the petition, or if the beneficiary is no longer receiving 
training as specified in the petition; or 
(2) The statement of facts contained in the petition or on the application for a 
temporary labor certification was not true and correct, inaccurate, 
fraudulent, or misrepresented a material fact; or 
1 We conduct appellate review on a de novo basis. Matter ofSimeio Solutions, LLC, 26l&N Dec. 542 (AAO 2015); see 
also 5 U.S.C. § 557(b) ("On appeal from or review of the initial decision, the agency has all the powers which it would 
have in making the initial decision except as it may limit the issues on notice or by rule."); Dor v. INS, 891 F.2d 997, 
1 002 n. 9 (2d Cir. 1989). 
Matter of 1-, LLC 
(3) The petitioner violated terms and conditions of the approved petition; or 
(4) The petitioner violated requirements of section 10l(a)(15)(H) ofthe Act or 
paragraph (h) ofthis section; or 
(5) The approval of the petition violated paragraph (h) of this section or 
involved gross error. 
Upon review of the record, we determine that the Director properly revoked the approval of the 
petition pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(ll)(iii)(A)(5): "The approval of the petition violated 
paragraph (h) of this section or involved gross error." The Director's initial approval of the petition 
violated paragraph (h) of this section, in that the evidence of record was insufficient to establish that 
the Beneficiary was qualified to perform the duties of the proffered position. 
III. BENEFICIARY QUALIFICATIONS 
A. Legal Framework 
Section 214(i)(2) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1184(i)(2), states that an individual applying for 
classification as an H-lB nonimmigrant worker must possess: 
(A) full state licensure to practice in the occupation, if such licensure is required to 
practice in the occupation, 
(B) completion of the degree described in paragraph (l)(B) for the occupation, or 
(C) (i) experience in the specialty equivalent to the completion of such degree, and 
(ii) recognition of expertise in the specialty through progressively responsible 
positions relating to the specialty. 
In implementing section 214(i)(2) of the Act, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C) states 
that a beneficiary must also meet one of the following criteria in order to qualify to perform services 
in a specialty occupation: 
(I) Hold a United States baccalaureate or higher degree required by the specialty 
occupation from an accredited college or university; 
(2) Hold a foreign degree determined to be equivalent to a United States 
baccalaureate or higher degree required by the specialty occupation from an 
accredited college or university; 
2 
Matter of 1-, LLC 
(3) Hold an unrestricted State license, registration or certification which authorizes 
him or her to fully practice the specialty occupation and be immediately engaged 
in that specialty in the state of intended employment; or 
( 4) Have education, specialized training, and/or progressively responsible 
experience that is equivalent to completion of a United States baccalaureate or 
higher degree in the specialty occupation, and have recognition of expertise in 
the specialty through progressively responsible positions directly related to the 
specialty. 
In addition, 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(v)(A) states: 
General. If an occupation requires a state or local license for an individual to fully 
perform the duties of the occupation, an alien (except an H -1 C nurse) seeking H 
classification in that occupation must have that license prior to approval of the 
petition to be found qualified to enter the United States and immediately engage in 
employment in the occupation. 
Therefore, to qualify a beneficiary for classification as an H-1 B nonimmigrant worker under the Act, 
the petitioner must establish that the beneficiary possesses the requisite license or, if none is 
required, that the beneficiary has completed a degree in the specialty that the occupation requires. 
Alternatively, if a license is not required and if the beneficiary does not possess the required U.S. 
degree or its foreign degree equivalent, the petitioner must show that the beneficiary possesses both 
(1) education, specialized training, and/or progressively responsible experience in the specialty 
equivalent to the completion of such degree, and (2) recognition of expertise in the specialty through 
progressively responsible positions relating to the specialty. 
In order to equate a beneficiary's credentials to a U.S. baccalaureate or higher degree, the provisions 
at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D) require one or more ofthe following: 
(I) An evaluation from an official who has authority to grant college-level credit for 
training and/or experience in the specialty at an accredited college or university 
which has a program for granting such credit based on an individual's training 
and/or work experience; 
(2) The results of recognized college-level equivalency examinations or special 
credit programs, such as the College Level Examination Program (CLEP), or 
Program on Noncollegiate Sponsored Instruction (PONSI); 
(3) An evaluation of education by a reliable credentials evaluation service which 
specializes in evaluating foreign educational credentials;2 
2 The Petitioner should note that, in accordance with this provision, we will accept a credential evaluation service's 
3 
Matter of 1-, LLC 
( 4) Evidence of certification or registration from a nationally-recognized 
professional association or society for the specialty that is known to grant 
certification or registration to persons in the occupational specialty who have 
achieved a certain level of competence in the specialty; 
(5) A determination by the Service that the equivalent of the degree required by the 
specialty occupation has been acquired through a combination of education, 
specialized training, and/or work experience in areas related to the specialty and 
that the alien has achieved recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation as 
a result of such training and experience .... 
In accordance with 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5): 
For purposes of determining equivalency to a baccalaureate degree in the 
specialty, three years of specialized training and/or work experience must be 
demonstrated for each year of college-level training the alien lacks .... It must 
be clearly demonstrated that the alien's training and/or work experience included 
the theoretical and practical application of specialized knowledge required by the 
specialty occupation; that the alien's experience was gained while working with 
peers, supervisors, or subordinates who have a degree or its equivalent in the 
specialty occupation; and that the alien has recognition of expertise in the 
specialty evidenced by at least one type of documentation such as: 
(i) Recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation by at least two 
recognized authorities in the same specialty occupation; 3 
(ii) Membership in a recognized foreign or United States association or 
society in the specialty occupation; 
(iii) Published material by or about the alien in professional publications, trade 
journals, books, or major newspapers; 
(iv) Licensure or registration to practice the specialty occupation in a foreign 
country; or 
(v) Achievements which a recognized authority has determined to be 
significant contributions to the field of the specialty occupation. 
evaluation of education only, not training and/or work experience. 
3 Recognized authority means a person or organization with expertise in a particular field, special skills or knowledge in 
that field, and the expertise to render the type of opinion requested. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(ii). A recognized authority's 
opinion must state: (1) the writer's qualifications as an expert; (2) the writer's experience giving such opinions, citing 
specific instances where past opinions have been accepted as authoritative and by whom; (3) how the conclusions were 
reached; and ( 4) the basis for the conclusions supported by copies or citations of any research material used. !d. 
4 
(b)(6)
Matter of I-, LLC 
It is always worth noting that, by its very terms, 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5) is a matter strictly 
for application and determination by USCIS, and that, also by the clear terms of the rule, experience 
will merit a positive determination only to the extent that the record of proceeding establishes all of 
the qualifying elements at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5), including, but not limited to, a type of 
recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation. 
B. Factual History 
The Petitioner is a five-employee franchise of 
Beneficiary in a full-time "Marketing Specialist" position. 
and seeks to employ the 
The Labor Condition Application (LCA) submitted to support the visa petitiOn states that the 
proffered position corresponds to Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code and occupation 
title 13-1161, "Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists," from the Occupational 
Information Network (O*NET). The LCA further states that the proffered position is a Level I, 
entry-level , position. 
The Petitioner described the job duties of the proffered position as follows: 
Research market conditions in local, regional, or national areas, or gather 
information to determine potential sales of a product or service. May gather 
information on competitors, prices, sales, and methods of marketing and distribution. 
The Market Research Analyst is principally responsible for interpreting data, 
formulating reports and making recommendations based upon the research findings. 
To accomplish this task, the Market Research Analyst works with the client (either 
internal or external) to understand, define and document the overarching business 
object. The Market Research Analyst applies qualitative and quantitative techniques 
to interpret the data and produce substantial recommendations. Market Research 
Analysts frequently present the findings and recommendations to the client. 
The · Petitioner listed the requirements for the proffered position as including a bachelor's or 
advanced degree in Industrial Engineering or Business , and several years of related experience , 
The Petitioner submitted evidence that the Beneficiary has the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor 's degree 
in Industrial Engineering. The Petitioner also submitted, inter alia, the Beneficiary 's transcript from 
the from which the Beneficiary graduated with a bachelor's degree m 
Industrial Engineering - Industrial Production. 
In a letter dated December 7, 2012, submitted in response to the Director's request for evidence 
(RFE), the Petitioner asserted that "[t]he [B]eneficiary qualifies for the proffered position through 
his attainment of a U.S. equivalent Bachelor's degree in Industrial Engineering which fully relates to 
a business/marketing degree for the purpose of working as a Marketing Specialist." The Petitioner 
further asserted that the Beneficiary "has completed multiple core courses directly related to the 
theoretical knowledge required · for Marketing Specialists as listed by the [Department of Labor] in 
5 
(b)(6)
Matter of 1-, LLC 
the [Occupational Outlook Handbook] and through O*NET," including courses in "critical thinking, 
management, math, economics, quantitative research, business planning, and accounting." 
The Petitioner alternatively asserted that "even if the [B]eneficiary's undergraduate degree was not 
related to a business degree, that the minimum requirement for a Marketing Specialist ... is merely 
the possession of any U.S. equivalent Bachelor 's degree." 
In an undated letter, the Petitioner provided another description of the proffered job duties with 
percentages of time spent on each duty, as follows: 
• Gather data about current and potential customers, competitors and market conditions in the 
(35%) 
• Analyze gathered data (20%) 
• Report research results to [the Petitioner's] management and proposed appropriate changes to 
sales[] (1 0%) 
• Analyze and report on [the Petitioner 's] sales in terms of potential growth/maximization of 
return (25%) 
• Analyze and report on [the Petitioner's] business processes/operations in terms of effective 
maximization and growth (10%) 
The Petitioner affirmed that the proffered position requires a bachelor 's or advanced degree in 
Engineering, Business, or a related field, and several years of related experience. 
C. Analysis 
We find that the evidence of record does not sufficiently demonstrate that the Beneficiary' s degree 
in Industrial Engineering qualifies him to perform the duties of the proffered position. The 
Petitioner must demonstrate that the Beneficiary obtained knowledge of the particular occupation in 
which he will be employed. See Matter of Ling, 13 I&N Dec. 35 (Reg'l Comm'r 1968). 
The Petitioner seeks the Beneficiary's services as a Marketing Specialist und er the Market Research 
Analysts and Marketing Specialists occupational classification. While the Beneficiary appears to be 
qualified to perform the duties of a specialty occupation directly related to Industrial Engineering , 
the evidence of record does not demonstrate how the Beneficiary, by virtue of holding a degree in 
Industrial Engineering , is qualified to perform the duties of the Marketing Specialist position 
proffered here. That is, the evidence of record does not sufficiently demonstrate how the 
Beneficiary's degree in Industrial Engineering provides him with the body of highly specialized 
knowledge required to perform the proffered duties. 
According to the U.S. Department of Labor' s Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) , 
"[m]arket research analysts typically need a bachelor 's degree in market research or a related field."4 
4 
We recognize the Handb ook as an authoritati ve source on the duties and educational requirements of the wide variety 
6 
(b)(6)
Matter of I-, LLC 
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2014-15 
ed., "Market Research Analysts," http://www. bls. gov I ooh/business~and- financial/market- research­
analysts.htm#tab-4 (last visited Dec. 1, 20 15). The Handbook likewise states that "[ c ]ourses in ... 
marketing are essential for these workers." Jd. Here, however, the Petitioner did not furnish 
sufficient evidence to establish that the Beneficiary's degree in Industrial Engineering encompasses 
any marketing courses that provides him the body of highly specialized knowledge in market 
research "essential" to performing the proffered duties. 
Moreover, the evidence of record is insufficient to establish that the Beneficiary's degree in 
Industrial Engineering could reasonably be considered "related" to a degree in market 
research. The 
Petitioner asserted that the Beneficiary's degree in Industrial Engineering "qualifies as a related 
degree" because of "multiple core courses directly related to the theoretical knowledge required for 
Marketing Specialists." The Petitioner listed these "multiple core courses" as including courses in 
"critical thinking, management, math, economics, quantitative research, business planning, and 
accounting." In support, the Petitioner pointed to the Handbook's statement indicating that market 
research analysts need strong math and analytical skills.5 See U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of 
Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2014-15 ed., "Market Research Analysts," 
http:/ /www.bls.gov/ooh/business-and- financial/market-research-analysts.htm#tab-1 (last visited Dec. 
1, 2015). 
However, the Petitioner has not sufficiently established how a few related or overlapping courses, 
such . as management and math, provide sufficient preparation for the proffered position in the 
absence of "essential" marketing courses. While a few related or overlapping courses may be 
beneficial, or even required, to perform certain duties of the proffered position, the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate that these related 
or overlapping courses, alone, adequately provide the Beneficiary with 
the knowledge necessary to perform the proffered position. For example, it is not clear how courses 
in management and math provide the Beneficiary with the necessary knowledge to perform the 
proffered duty of "[gathering] data about current and potential customers, competitors and market 
conditions in the 'which accounts for 35% of the proffered position's time. 
We note that the Petitioner did not claim that the Beneficiary's degree was equivalent to a degree in 
any field other than Industrial Engineering. The Petitioner also did not submit sufficient information 
in order for USCIS to have made an equivalency determination in accordance with 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5) . Accordingly , as sufficient evidence was not presented that the Beneficiary 
has at least a bachelor 's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, related to the duties and 
responsibilities of the proffered position, we cannot find that the Beneficiary is qualified to perform 
of occupations that it addresses . The Handbook , which is available in printed form, may also be accessed on the Internet, 
at http://www.bls.gov /oco/. All our references to the Handbook are to the 2014 - 2015 edition available online. 
5 The 2012-2013 edition of the Handbook, to which the Petitioner cited, stated that "[m]arket research analysts need 
strong math and 
analytical skills." Although this exact statement is no longer in the 2014-2015 edition, the 2014 -
2015 edition contains a similar statement that "[s]trong math and analytical skills are essentiaL" 
7 
Matter of 1-, LLC 
the duties of the proffered position. The appeal will be dismissed and the approval of the petition 
revoked for this reason. 
IV. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION 
Finally, we will address another additional, independent ground, not identified by the Director's 
notice of revocation, that would also warrant revocation of the approval of this petition pursuant to 8 
C.P.R.§ 214.2(h)(ll)(iii)(A)(5). Specifically, we find that the evidence of record is insufficient to 
establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
Here, the Petitioner attested that the minimum educational requirement for the proffered position 
could be satisfied by a bachelor's degree in engineering or business. However, the Petitioner's 
acceptance of bachelor's degrees in engineering or business, without more, is inadequate to establish 
that the proposed position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
First, the Petitioner's requirement of a degree in business, without further specification, indicates 
that the proffered position does not qualify as a specialty occupation. See Royal Siam Corp. v. 
Chertoff, 484 F.3d 139, 147 (1st Cir. 2007) (stating that a requirement of a general-purpose 
bachelor's degree, such as a business administration degree, without more, will not justify the 
granting of a petition for an H-lB specialty occupation visa). A petitioner must demonstrate that the 
proffered position requires a precise and specific course of study that relates directly and closely to 
the position in question. Since there must be a close correlation between the required specialized 
studies and the position, the requirement of a degree with a generalized title, such as business, 
without further specification, does not establish the position as a specialty occupation. Cf Matter of 
Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. 558, 560 (Comm'r 1988). 
To prove that a job requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge as required by section 214(i)(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. The regulation at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii), in pertinent part, defines the term "specialty 
occupation" as an occupation which 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. 
In addition, 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.6 Although a general-
6 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). 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 Independence Joint 
Venture v. Fed. Sav. and Loan Ins. Corp., 489 U.S. 561 (1989); Matter of W-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 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). To avoid this result, 8 C.F.R. 
8 
Matter of I-, LLC 
purpose bachelor's degree in Business 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. Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d 139, 147 (1st 
Cir. 2007).7 
Second, a minimum entry requirement of degrees in two disparate fields, such as engineering and 
business, further indicates that the proffered position does not qualify as a specialty occupation. 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 two disparate fields, such as 
engineering and business, 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. 8 Section 
214(i)(l)(B) of the Act (emphasis added). The Petitioner did not do so here. In other words, the 
Petitioner has not sufficiently established how the fields of engineering and business are closely or 
directly related to the duties and responsibilities of the particular position proffered in this matter. 
§ 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)(l) of the Act and the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(ii), US CIS 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. 
7 Specifically, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit explained in Royal Siam that: 
!d. 
The courts and the agency consistently have stated that, although a general-purpose bachelor's 
degree, such as a business administration degree, may be a legitimate prerequisite for a particular 
position, requiring such a degree, without more, will not justify the granting of a petition for an H-1 B 
specialty occupation visa. See, e.g., Tapis 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. 
8 While the statutory "the" and the regulatory "a" both denote a singular "specialty," 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. See section 214(i)(l)(B) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(ii). This also includes even seemingly disparate specialties providing, again, the evidence of record 
establishes how each acceptable, specific field of study is directly related to the duties and responsibilities of the 
particular position. 
9 
Matter of 1-, LLC 
Therefore, absent evidence of a direct relationship between the claimed degrees required and the 
duties and responsibilities of the position, it cannot be found that the proffered position requires 
anything more than a general bachelor's degree. The Petitioner even admitted as much, asserting 
that "the minimum requirement for a Marketing Specialist ... is merely the possession of any U.S. 
equivalent Bachelor's degree." As discussed above, the claim that a general bachelor's degree is a 
sufficient minimum requirement for entry into the proffered position is inadequate to establish that 
the proposed position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
The proffered position is further precluded from recognition as a specialty occupation for additional 
reasons. For instance, we observe that the LCA submitted to support the petition states that the 
proffered position corresponded to SOC code and title 13-1161, "Market Research Analysts," from 
O*NET. According to the Handbook, a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or the 
equivalent, is not a normal minimum entry requirement into the occupation. That is, the Handbook 
states that, in addition to a degree in market research, degrees in statistics, math, computer science, 
business administration, any of the social sciences, or communications may also suffice for entry 
into market research analyst positions. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 
Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2014-15 ed., "Market Research Analysts," 
http://www. bls. gov I ooh/business-and- financial/market- research -anal ysts.htm#tab-4 (last visited Dec. 
1, 2015). As discussed above, the acceptance of a general-purpose business degree or degrees in 
disparate fields indicates that the proffered position does not qualify as a specialty occupation. 
As the evidence of record is insufficient to establish that the proffered position qualifies as a 
specialty occupation, the matter would have to be remanded for the purpose of issuing a new notice 
of intent to revoke, even if the grounds for revocation identified by the Director were overcome on 
appeal. 
V. CONCLUSION 
Upon review of the record, we determine that the Director properly revoked the approval of the 
petition pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(11)(iii)(A)(5). The petition will remain revoked and the 
appeal dismissed. In visa petition proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for 
the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 ofthe Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter ofOtiende, 26 I&N 
Dec. 127, 128 (BIA 2013) (citing Matter of Brantigan, 11 I&N Dec. 493, 495 (BIA 1966)). Here, 
that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of 1-, LLC, ID# 15024 (AAO Dec. 18, 20 15) 
10