dismissed H-1B Case: Media Communications

(b)(6)
DATE: FEB 2" 4 ,2015 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
OFFICE: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. 
This is a non-precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish 
agency policy through non-precedent decisions. If you believe the AAO incorrectly applied current law or 
policy to your case or if you seek to present new facts for consideration, you may file a motion to reconsider 
or a motion to reopen, respectively. Any motion must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion 
(Form I-290B) within 33 days of the date of this decision. Please review the Form I-290B instructions at 
http://www.uscis.gov/forms for the latest information on fee, filing location, and other requirements. 
See also 8 C.P.R. § 103.5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Thank you, 
www.nscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the nonimmigrant visa petition, and the matter is 
now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
The petition will be denied. 
I. INTRODUCTION 
On the Form I-129 visa petltlon, the petitioner describes itself as a 141-employee university1 
established in In order to employ the beneficiary in what it designates as a full-time media 
communications analyst position at a salary of $50,000.04 per year,2 the petitioner seeks to classify 
her as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). 
The director denied the petition, concluding that the evidence of record failed to establish that the 
proffered position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. 
The record of proceeding before us contains the following: (1) the Form 1-129 and supporting 
documentation; (2) the director's request for additional evidence (RFE); (3) the petitioner's response 
to the RFE; (4) the director's letter denying the petition; and (5) the Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal 
or Motion, and supporting documentation. 
Upon review of the entire record of proceeding, we find that the evidence of record does not overcome 
the director's basis for denying this petition. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed, and the petition 
will be denied. 
II. STANDARD OF REVIEW 
In the exercise of our administrative review in this matter, as in all matters that come within our 
purview, we follow the preponderance of the evidence standard as specified in the controlling 
precedent decision, Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369 (AAO 2010), unless the law specifically 
provides that a different standard applies. In pertinent part, that decision states the following: 
Except where a different standard is specified by law, a petitioner or applicant in 
administrative immigration proceedings must prove by· a preponderance of evidence 
that he or she is eligible for the benefit sought. 
1 The petitioner provided a North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code of 611310, 
"Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools." U.S. Dep't of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, North 
American Industry Classification System, 2012 NAICS Definition, "611310 Colleges, Universities, and 
Professional Schools," http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch (last visited February 4, 2015). 
2 The Labor Condition Application (LCA) submitted by the petitioner in support of the petition was certified 
for use with a job prospect within the "Market Research Analysts and Marketing" occupational classification, 
SOC (O*NET/OES) Code 13-1161, and a Level II (qualified) prevailing wage rate. 
(b)(6)
Page 3 
* * * 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
The "preponderance of the evidence" of "truth" is made based on the factual 
circumstances of each individual case. 
* * * 
Thus, in adjudicating the application pursuant to the preponderance of the evidence 
standard, the director must examine each piece of evidence for relevance, probative 
value, and credibility, both individually and within the context of the totality of the 
evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is probably true. 
Even if the director has some doubt as to the truth, if the petitioner submits relevant, 
probative, and credible evidence that leads the director to believe that the claim is 
"more likely than not" or "probably" true, the applicant or petitioner has satisfied the 
standard of proof. See INS v. Cardoza-Foncesca, 480 U.S. 421, 431 (1987) 
(discussing "more likely than not" as a greater than 50% chance of an occurrence 
taking place). If the director can articulate a material doubt, it is appropriate for the 
director to either request additional evidence or, if that doubt leads the director to 
believe that the claim is probably not true, deny the application or petition. 
Id. at 375-76. 
We conduct our review of service center decisions on a de novo basis. See Soltane v. DOJ, 381 
F.3d at 145. In doing so, as noted above, we apply the preponderance of the evidence standard as 
outlined in Matter of Chawathe. Upon our review of the present matter pursuant to that standard, 
however, we find that the evidence in the record of proceeding does not support counsel's 
contentions that the evidence of record requires that the petition at issue be approved. Applying the 
preponderance of the evidence standard as stated in Matter of Chawathe, we find that the director's 
ground for denial was correct. Upon our review of the entire record of proceeding, and with close 
attention and due regard to all of the evidence, separately and in the aggregate, submitted in support 
of this petition, we find that the evidence of record does not establish that the claim of a proffer of a 
specialty occupation position is "more likely than not" or "probably" true. In other words, as the 
evidentiary analysis of this decision will reflect, the petitioner has not submitted relevant, probative, 
and credible evidence that leads us to believe that the petitioner's claim that the proffered position 
qualifies as a specialty occupation is "more likely than not" or "probably" true. 
III. LAW 
To meet the petitioner's burden of proof in establishing the proffered posttton as a specialty 
occupation, the evidence of record must establish that the employment the petitioner is offering to 
the beneficiary meets the following statutory and regulatory requirements. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 4 
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) states, in pertinent part, the following: 
Specialty occupation means an occupation which [(1)] requires theoretical and 
practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge in fields of human 
endeavor including, but not limited to, architecture, engineering, mathematics, 
physical sciences, social sciences, medicine and health, education, business 
specialties, accounting, law, theology, and the arts, and which [(2)] requires the 
attainment of a bachelor's degree or higher in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, as 
a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States. 
Pursuant to 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty occupation, a proposed position 
must also meet one of the following criteria: 
(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. 
As a threshold issue, it is noted that 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) must logically be read together 
with section 214(i)(l) of the Act and 8 C.P.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(ii). In other words, this regulatory 
language must be construed in harmony with the thrust of the related provisions and with the statute 
as a whole. SeeK Mart Corp. v. Cartier, Inc., 486 U.S. 281, 291 (1988) (holding that construction 
of language which takes into account the design of the statute as a whole is preferred); see also 
COlT Independence Joint Venture v. Federal 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.P.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) should logically be read as being necessary but not necessarily sufficient to 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 5 
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. § 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), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) consistently interprets the 
term "degree" in the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to mean not just any baccalaureate or 
higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proffered position. See 
Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d 139, 147 (1st Cir. 2007) (describing "a degree requirement 
in a specific specialty" as "one that relates directly to the duties and responsibilities of a particular 
position"). Applying this standard, USCIS regularly approves H-lB petitions for qualified aliens 
who are to be employed as engineers, computer scientists, certified public accountants, college 
professors, and other such occupations. These professions, for which petitioners have regularly 
been able to establish a minimum entry requirement in the United States of a baccalaureate or 
higher degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent directly related to the duties and 
responsibilities of the particular position, fairly represent the types of specialty occupations that 
Congress contemplated when it created the H-lB visa category. 
To determine whether a particular job qualifies as a specialty occupation, USCIS does not simply 
rely on a position's title. The specific duties of the proffered position, combined with the nature of 
the petitioning entity's business operations, are factors to be considered. users must examine the 
ultimate employment of the alien, and determine whether the position qualifies as a specialty 
occupation. See generally Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F. 3d 384. The critical element is not the title 
of the position nor an employer's self-imposed standards, but whether the position actually requires 
the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and the 
attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in the specific specialty as the minimum for entry 
into the occupation, as required by the Act. 
IV. ANALYSIS 
Based upon a complete review of the record of proceeding, we agree with the director and find that 
the evidence of record fails to establish that the position as described constitutes a specialty 
occupation. 
In a January 17, 2014 letter submitted in support of the petition, the petitioner stated that the duties 
of the proffered position would include the following tasks: 
� Analyze surveys and integrate findings into the media strategy with regards to the 
use of media outlets with the goal of reaching larger audiences and prospective 
students, both locally and internationally. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISI0/1 
Page 6 
� Develop research methodology and design format for gathering data. Conduct 
surveys for current and prospective students that assess the most popular and 
effective media outlets for providing and receiving information. 
� Monitor and provide analysis to upper management regarding (the petitioner's] 
online evaluation survey feedback from students regarding professors, course 
development, and education quality. 
� Measure the effectiveness of current marketing and media for justification of the 
media communications expenses and to demonstrate efficient and effective use of 
media and marketing funds. Report monthly on media spending and outcomes for 
the Marketing Department. Develop budgetary plans for media communications to 
ensure adherence to budget restrictions as allotted by the marketing Department. 
� Collaborate with University Executives to better understand business needs. 
� Identify marketing problems and opportunities to grow student enrollment and define 
and prioritize information needs. Lead strategy meetings that develop programming 
for campaigns, including potential media storylines, content, projects, and articles. 
� Based on metrics, assist in developing the annual Marketing Department Plan and 
continuously modify as media sources develop, network expands, and media 
outcomes are assessed. 
� Analyze domestic and global trends in education in order to develop strategies to 
drive performance in different geographic areas and modify all international media 
kits for distribution, tailoring to specific cultures, languages, and delivery of content 
based off resources and technology available to the country, focusing on Europe and 
Asia. 
� Collaborate with and advise the Communications Coordinators and Director of 
Marketing in the development of all videos, ads and other media production to 
promote the University's programs, events, and services. 
� Lead research, develop document specification drafts and final revisions of written 
. content for press releases, marketing publication, student recruitment packages, and 
media reports. 
� Ensure media communications support the growth of all University departments. 
Incorporate a variety of tools in media communications and execution of strategies, 
including photography, videography, digital productions, publications, website 
contact, social media and in-person interview. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 7 
� Build relationships with the local and international community through outreach 
programs with the use of media production and information. 
� From inception, create concept for and initialize production of quarterly University 
magazine. Oversee content and quality of publications and adhere to deadlines and 
budgetary constraints. 
In addition to its letter of support, the petitioner submitted a letter, dated January 14, 2014, from 
a professor at evaluating the educational requirements of the 
media communications analyst position. 
The director found the initial evidence insufficient to demonstrate that the proffered position 
qualifies as a specialty occupation and requested additional evidence. In response to the director's 
RFE, the petitioner submitted a letter, dated February 20, 2014, in which it grouped the duties of the 
proffered position according to the percentage time the beneficiary would spend in a particular task 
as follows: 
A. Analyze data and feedback on marketing strategy and identify areas for 
improvement: 35%, 14 hours per week on average. 
1. The job duties outlined below require the services of a person who has a 
college degree in business, because the job duties require: advanced 
knowledge of the ability to research, interpret and use business and 
financial data, research methods, critical thinking, understanding of 
marketing strategies for diverse populations, distinguishing relevant from 
irrelevant information, identifying issues and problems, and the ability to 
analyze data. 
1) Analyze surveys and integrate findings into the media strategy with 
regards to the use of media outlets with the goal of reaching larger 
audiences and prospective students, both locally and internationally. 
2) Review feedback from alumni and current students regarding the most 
effective use of media outlets for disseminating information about [the 
petitioner], including social media. 
3) Monitor and provide analysis to upper management regarding [the 
petitioner] online evaluation survey feedback from students regarding 
professors, course development, and education quality. 
4) Perform analysis of enrollment performance and student demographics 
as related to marketing campaigns. 
5) Track marketing campaign leads captured through various forms of 
media to identify most fruitful marketing initiatives. 
6) Develop research methodology and design format for gathering data to 
most effectively capture information. 
B. Reporting and Budget Responsibilities: 10%, 4 hours per week on average. 
(b)(6)
Page 8 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISI01 
1. The job duties outlined below require the services of a person who has a 
college degree in business, because the job duties require: the ability to 
distill complex information into easily understood presentations, advanced 
oral and written communication skills, and accounting skills. 
1) Create monthly report for [the petitioner] executives on effectiveness 
of marketing and media initiatives both domestic and international and 
media spending. Develop budgetary plans for media communications 
to ensure adherence to budget restrictions as allotted by the Marketing 
Department. 
2) Make presentations to [the petitioner] executive branch regarding 
current state of media spending and effectiveness of strategy, including 
reports on the state of marketing to particular populations, in particular 
Europe and Asia. 
C. Develop [the petitioner's] international and domestic marketing strategy based on 
research and analysis designed to increase student enrollment and expand [the 
petitioner's] reputation as a university of excellence: 35%, 14 hours per week on 
average. 
1. The job duties outlined below require the services of a person who has a 
college degree in business, because the job duties require: advanced 
knowledge of the international education market, competition among 
accredited universities, understanding of effective communication strategies 
for diverse populations and a variety of cultural groups, and the ability to 
research, interpret and use business and financial data. 
1) Analyze domestic and global trends in education in order to develop 
strategies to drive performance in different geographic areas and 
modify all international media kits for distribution, tailoring to specific 
cultures, languages, and delivery of content based off resources and 
technology available to the country focusing on Europe and Asia. 
2) Measure the effectiveness of current marketing and media for 
justification of the media communications expenses and to demonstrate 
efficient and effective use of media and marketing funds. Using that 
knowledge, identify new opportunities or changes to current initiatives. 
3) Lead strategy meetings that develop programming for campaigns, 
including potential media storylines, content, projects, and articles. 
4) Based on metrics, assist in developing the annual Marketing 
Department Plan and continuously modify as media sources develop, 
network expands, and media outcomes are assessed. 
5) Collaborate with University Executives to better understand business 
needs. 
6) Identify marketing problems and opportunities to grow student 
enrollment and define and prioritize information needs. 
(b)(6)
Page 9 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
7) Build relationships with the local and international community based 
on sound media strategy through outreach programs with the use of 
media production and information. 
D. Evaluate and develop marketing materials based on research and analysis into 
trends and data from students. 20%, 8 hours per week on average. 
i. The job duties outlined below require the services of a person who has a 
college degree in business, because the job duties require: project 
management skills, advanced understanding of the international and 
domestic education market, competition among accredited universities, the 
ability to utilize business data in the formulation of marketing materials. 
1) Collaborate with and advise the Communication Coordinators and 
Director of Marketing in the development of all videos, ads and other 
media production to promote the University's programs, events, and 
services. 
2) Ensure media communications support the growth of all University 
departments. Incorporate a variety of tools in media communications 
and execution of strategies, including photography, videography, 
digital productions, publications, website contact, social media and in­
person interviews. 
3) Lead research, develop document specification drafts and final 
revisions of written content for press releases, marketing publications, 
student recruitment packages, and media reports. 
4) From inception, create concept for and initialize production of 
quarterly University magazine. Oversee content and quality of 
publications and adhere to deadlines and budgetary constraints. 
The petitioner also states that the beneficiary will "[p]erform analysis of enrollment performance 
and student demographics as related to marketing campaigns" and "[t]rack marketing campaign 
leads captured through various forms of media to identify most fruitful marketing initiatives" in 
addition to the duties listed previously in the support letter. With its RFE response letter, the 
petitioner re-submitted the documents previously it submitted with the initial filing of the petition. 
Upon review, we find that the evidence is insufficient to satisfy any criterion described at 8 C.F.R. § 
214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)( A). 
We will first address the position evaluation from who concluded that "the position of 
'Media Communications Analyst' is a specialty occupation requiring bachelor's-level educational 
training and/or professional experience in Communication, Marketing, Media Communications, or a 
related area." At the outset, we note that letter is not accompanied by, and does not 
expressly state the full content of, whatever documentation, personal observations, and/or oral 
transmissions upon which he may have been based his opinion. For example, does not 
indicate whether he visited the petitioner's business premises or spoke with anyone affiliated with the 
petitioner, so as to ascertain and base his opinion upon, the substantive nature and educational 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 10 
requirements of the proposed duties as they would be actually performed. Nor did he specify and 
discuss any studies, surveys, or other authoritative publications, and, significantly, he did not 
discuss the pertinent occupational information provided in the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL ) 
Occupational Outlook Handb ook (the Handb ook). It appears as though did not base his 
opinion on any objective evidence, but instead simply restated the duties of the proffered position in the 
same bullet-pointed fashion as provided by the petitioner. We find that, for these reasons alone, and 
independent of the other material deficiencies to be noted below, letter is not probative 
evidence of the proffered position satisfying any of the criteria described at 8 C.F.R. § 
214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A). 
However, even. if these foundational deficiencies were not present, letter would still not 
satisfy any of the criteria described at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A). First, it is noted that 
did not discuss the duties of the proffered position in substantive detail. To the contrary, he simply 
listed the duties of the media communications analyst position. The extent of meaningful analysis 
involved in the formulation of his letter, therefore, is not apparent. 
Furthermore, does not indicate whether he considered, or was even aware of, the fact that 
the petitioner submitted an LCA certified for a wage-level that is appropriate for a position 
involving only moderately complex tasks requiring limited judgment. 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. 
As indicated above, the LCA submitted by the petitioner in support of the instant position was 
certified for use with a job prospect within the "Market Research Analysts and Marketing 
Specialists" occupational category, SOC (O*NET/OES) Code 13-1161, and a Level II (qualified) 
prevailing wage rate, the second lowest of the four assignable wage-levels. The Prevailing Wage 
Determination Policy Guidance issued by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL ) states the following 
with regard to Level II wage rates: 
Level II (qualified) wage rates are assigned to job offers for qualified employees 
who have attained, either through education or experience, a good understanding of 
the occupation. They perform moderately complex tasks that require limited 
judgment. An indicator that the job request warrants a wage determination at Level 
II would be a requirement for years of education and/or experience that are generally 
required as described in the O*NET Job Zones.3 
The proposed duties' level of complexity, uniqueness, and specialization, as well as the level of 
independent judgment and occupational understanding required to perform them, are questionable, as 
3 U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance, 
Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/ 
pdf/NPWHC_Guidance_Revised_11_2009.pdf (last visited December 31, 2014). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 11 
the petitioner submitted an LCA certified for a Level II wage level. In accordance with the relevant 
DOL explanatory information on wage levels, this wage rate indicates, at best, that the beneficiary 
is only required to perform moderately complex tasks that require limited judgment. 
The author's omission of such an important factor as the LCA wage-level significantly diminishes 
the evidentiary value of his assertions.4 
For all of these reasons, we find that the letter from is not probative evidence towards 
satisfying any criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 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. Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791 (Comm 'r 1988). 
We will now discuss the application of each supplemental, alternative criterion at 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A) to the evidence in this record of proceeding. 
We will first discuss the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l), which is satisfied by 
establishing that a baccalaureate or higher degree, or its equivalent, in a specific specialty is 
normally the minimum requirement for entry into the particular position that is the subject of the 
petition. 
We recognize the Handb ook as an authoritative source on the duties and educational requirements 
of the wide variety of occupations it addresses.5 As noted above, the LCA that the petitioner 
submitted in support of this petition was certified for a job offer falling within the "Market Research 
Analysts and Marketing Specialists" occupational category. 
The Handb ook states the following with regard to the duties of positions falling within the "Market 
Research Analysts" occupational category: 
Market research analysts study market conditions to examine potential sales of a 
product or service. They help companies understand what products people want, who 
will buy them, and at what price. 
Duties 
Market research analysts typically do the following: 
4 For example, while references to "complex multi-level functions entrusted to (the beneficiary]" 
are acknowledged, the petitioner's attestation to DOL that the beneficiary would perform only moderately 
complex tasks requiring only limited judgment undermines his findings. 
5 The Handbook, which is available in printed form, may also be accessed online at 
http://www.stats.bls.gov/oco/. Our references to the Handbook are from the 2014-15 edition available 
online. 
(b)(6)
Page 12 
• Monitor and forecast marketing and sales trends 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
• Measure the effectiveness of marketing programs and strategies 
• Devise and evaluate methods for collecting data, such as surveys, 
questionnaires, and opinion polls 
• Gather data about consumers, competitors, and market conditions 
• Analyze data using statistical software 
• Convert complex data and findings into understandable tables, graphs, and 
written reports 
• Prepare reports and present results to clients and management 
Market research analysts perform research and gather data to help a company market 
its products or services. They gather data on consumer demographics, preferences, 
needs, and buying habits. They collect data and information using a variety of 
methods, such as interviews, questionnaires, focus groups, market analysis surveys, 
public opinion polls, and literature reviews. 
Analysts help determine a company's position in the marketplace by researching their 
competitors and analyzing their prices, sales, and marketing methods. Using this 
information, they may determine potential markets, product demand, and pricing. 
Their knowledge of the targeted consumer enables them to develop advertising 
brochures and commercials, sales plans, and product promotions. 
Market research analysts evaluate data using statistical techniques and software. 
They must interpret what the data means for their client, and they may forecast future 
trends. They often make charts, graphs, and other visual aids to present the results of 
their research. 
U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbo ok, 2014-15 ed., 
"Market Research Analysts," http://www .bls.gov /ooh/business-and-financial/market -research­
analysts.htm#tab-2 (last visited December 31, 2014). 
The Handb ook states the following with regard to the educational requirements necessary for 
entrance into this field: 
Market research analysts typically need a bachelor's degree in market research or a 
related field. Many have degrees in fields such as statistics, math, and computer 
science. Others have backgrounds in business administration, the social sciences, or 
communications. 
Courses in statistics, research methods, and marketing are essential for these 
workers. Courses in communications and social sciences, such as economics, 
psychology, and sociology, are also important. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 13 
Some market research analyst jobs require a master's degree. Several schools offer 
graduate programs in marketing research, but many analysts complete degrees in 
other fields, such as statistics and marketing, and/or earn a Master of Business 
Administration (MBA). A master's degree is often required for leadership positions 
or positions that perform more technical research. 
Jd. at http://www .bls.gov/ooh/business-and-financial/market-research-analysts.htm#tab-4 (last 
visited December 31, 2014). 
The Handbook does not report that a baccalaureate or higher degree, in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent is normally the minimum requirement for entry into positions within this occupational 
category. This passage of the Handbook reports that market research analysts have degrees and 
backgrounds in a wide-variety of disparate fields. Although the Handbook states that employees 
typically need a bachelor's degree in market research or a related field, it continues by indicating that 
many market research analysts have degrees in fields such as statistics, math, or computer science. 
According to the Handbo ok, other market research analysts have "backgrounds" in fields such as 
business administration, one of the social sciences, or communications. The Handbook notes that 
various courses are essential to this occupation, including statistics, research methods, and marketing. 
The Handbook states that courses in communications and social sciences (such as economics, 
psychology, and sociology) are also important. 
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)(1)(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 philosophy and 
engineering, would not meet the statutory requirement that the degree be "in the specific specialty (or 
its equivalent), unless the petitioner establishes how each field is directly related to the duties and 
responsibilities of the particular position such that the required body of highly specialized knowledge is 
essentially an amalgamation of these different specialties."6 Section 214(i)(1)(B) of the Act (emphasis 
added). 
Here, although the Handbook indicates that a bachelor's or higher degree is "typically" required, it also 
indicates that baccalaureate degrees in various fields are acceptable for entry into the occupation. In 
addition to recognizing degrees in disparate fields, i.e., social science and computer science as 
acceptable for entry into this field, the Handbook also states that "others have a background in business 
administration." Although a general-purpose bachelor's degree, such as a degree in business 
administration, may be a legitimate prerequisite for a particular position, requiring such a degree, 
6 Whether read with the statutory "the" or the regulatory "a," both readings denote a singular "specialty." 
Section 214(i)(l)(B) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). Still, we do not so narrowly interpret these 
provisions to exclude positions from qualifying as specialty occupations if they permit, as a minimum entry 
requirement, degrees in more than one closely related specialty. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 14 
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. Therefore, the Handb ook's 
recognition that a general, non-specialty "background" in business administration is sufficient for entry 
into the occupation strongly suggests that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty is not a standard, 
minimum entry requirement for this occupation. Accordingly, as the Handbook indicates that working 
as a market research analyst does not normally require at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent for entry into the occupation, the Handbook does not support the proffered 
position as being a specialty occupation. 
Our conclusion that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or the equivalent, is further underscored 
by counsel's assertion that "a degree in business is a common requirement." The requirement of a 
bachelor's degree in business is inadequate to establish that a position qualifies as a specialty 
occupation. A petitioner must demonstrate that the proffered position requires a precise and 
specific course of study that relates directly to the position in question. 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 Ass ociates, 19 r&N Dec. 558 
(eomm'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. As explained above, users interprets the degree requirement at 8 e.F.R. § 
214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A) to require a degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proposed 
position. users has consistently stated that, although a general-purpose bachelor's degree, such as 
a degree in business administration, may be a legitimate prerequisite for a particular position, 
requiring such a degree, without more, will not justify a finding that a particular position qualifies 
for classification as a specialty occupation. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d 139, 147 
(1st eir. 2007). 
Upon review of the totality of the evidence in the entire record of proceeding, we conclude that the 
petitioner has not established that the proffered position falls within an occupational category for which 
the Handbook , or other authoritative source/ indicates that a requirement for at least a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally required for entry into the occupation. 
Furthermore, the duties and requirements of the proffered position as described in the record of 
proceeding do not indicate that the particular position that is the subject of this petition is one for which 
a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry. 
As the evidence in the record of proceeding does not establish that at least a baccalaureate degree in 
a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the 
7 Counsel argues on appeal that the director "relies too heavily" on the Handbook. However, counsel cites no 
alternative, authoritative sources. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 15 
particular position that is the subject of this petition, the evidence of the record does not satisfy the 
criterion described at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). 
Next, we will review the record of proceeding regarding the first of the two alternative prongs of 
8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2). This prong alternatively calls for a petitioner to establish that a 
requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common (1) 
to the petitioner's industry; and (2) for positions within that industry that are both: (a) parallel to the 
proffered position, and (b) located in organizations that are similar to the petitioner. 
In determining whether there is such a common degree requirement, factors often considered by 
USCIS include: whether the Handboo k 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 1165 (quoting 
Hird/Blaker Corp. v. Sava, 712 F. Supp. 1102). 
Here and as already discussed, the evidence of record does not establish that the petitioner's proffered 
position is one for which the Handbook reports an industry-wide requirement for at least a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. Also, there are no submissions from professional 
associations in the petitioner's industry attesting that individuals employed in positions parallel to the 
proffered position are routinely required to have a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent for entry into those positions. While the assertions of with regard 
to an industry-wide recruiting and hiring standard are acknowledged, the record contains no evidence 
supporting his assertions. Again going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not 
sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Soffici, 22 
I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm'r 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 
(Reg. Comm'r 1972)). 
With its filing of the petition, the petitioner submitted copies of four job advertisements in support 
of its assertion that the degree requirement is common to the petitioner's industry in parallel 
positions among similar organizations. With its appeal, the petitioner submitted an additional three 
job advertisements. However, upon review of the documents, we find that the petitioner's reliance 
on the job advertisements is misplaced. 
On the Form I -129 petition, the petitioner describes itself as a university established in with 
141 employees. The petitioner claims that it has a gross annual income of $5,493,433. Although 
requested in the Form I-129 petition, the petitioner did not state its net annual income. In its 
support letter, the petitioner stated that its 2012-2013 academic year enrollment was 756 students, 
however, the petitioner does not specify the number of undergraduate and graduate students. 
As a preliminary matter, counsel's statement on appeal that a non-specific bachelor's degree in 
"business" is a common requirement undermines any claim that a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty, or the equivalent, is common (1) to the petitioner's industry; and (2) for positions within 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 16 
that industry that are both: (a) parallel to the proffered position, and (b) located in organizations that 
are similar to the petitioner. 
For the petitioner to establish that an organization located within its industry is also similar to it, it 
must demonstrate that the petitioner and the organization share the same general characteristics. 
Without such evidence, documentation submitted by a petitioner is generally outside the scope of 
consideration for this criterion, which encompasses only organizations that are similar to the 
petitioner. When determining whether the petitioner and the advertising organization share the 
same general characteristics, such factors may include information regarding the nature or type of 
organization, and, when pertinent, the particular scope of operations, as well as the level of revenue 
and staffing (to list just a few elements that may be considered). It is not sufficient for the petitioner 
to claim that an organization is similar and in the same industry without providing a legitimate basis 
for such an assertion. 
We have reviewed the seven job advertisements submitted by the petitiOner. The record of 
proceeding does not contain any independent evidence of how representative these job 
advertisements are of the particular advertising employers' recruiting history for the type of jobs 
advertised. Further, as they are only solicitations for hire, they are not evidence of the employers' 
actual hiring practices. 
The advertisements include positions at (a private institution established in 
with 13,204 undergraduate students enrolled in the 2014-2015 academic year),8 
(a private institution found in with 35,493 undergraduate students 
enrolled in the 2014-2015 academic year),9 
_ (established in and 
comprised of five universities and one early childhood education school),10 (a 
private institution established in with 268 undergraduate students enrolled in the 2014-2015 
academic year),11 (a private institution established m with 1,719 
undergraduate students enrolled in the 2014-2015 academic year),12 (a 
8 http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com, 
January 7, 2015). 
9 http:/ /colleges. usnews.rankingsandreviews.com 
visited January 7, 2015). 
1
0 
http:/h 
January 7, 2015). 
and http:/ 
11 http://colleges. usnews.rankingsandreviews.com 
2015). 
12 http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com 
January 7, 2015). 
(last visited 
(last 
(last visited 
(last visited January 7, 
(last visited 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 17 
private institution established in with 2414 undergraduate students enrolled in the 2014-2015 
academic year),13 and (a public institution established in with 12,796 
undergraduate students enrolled in the 2014-2015 academic year).14 
While these organizations may be considered to be more or less within the petitioner's industry, the 
evidence of record does not also establish that they show the same characteristics as the petitioner 
such that they are also "similar" to the petitioner. First, we note that the is a 
conglomeration of several educational institutions, including an early education school. Therefore, 
it is not similar to the petitioner. Furthermore, without additional information, the other institutions 
appear to be different in size than the petitioner with regard to student enrollment. Moreover, the 
record of proceeding does not contain sufficient information regarding the number of employees 
each institution employs and the academic programs they offer. Consequently, the record does not 
contain sufficient information regarding the advertising organizations to conduct a legitimate 
comparison of them to the petitioner. The record of proceeding therefore lacks evidence to 
establish that the advertising organizations are similar to the petitioner. Upon review, we find that 
the petitioner has not provided sufficient information regarding which aspects or traits it shares with 
these advertising organizations. 
Moreover, these advertisements do not appear to involve parallel positions. More specifically, the 
position with requires "3-5 years of marketing or public relations 
experience"; the position with requires a "4-8 years of marketing 
management experience (including at least three years of supervisory experience)"; the job 
announcement with ' requires a "minimum of 3 years marketing experience"; 
requires a "minimum of 2-5 years of content development, copy writing, and/or 
social media experience;" requires "at least five years of experience (three 
or more including graduate recruitment) of demonstrated successful experience in developing"; the 
position with requires "at least five years of ex erience in design field with 
previous supervisory experience"; and the position with requires "two years 
of experience in marketing, assisting managers." The petitioner designated the proffered position 
on the LCA through the wage level as a Level II position, which as stated earlier, the individual in 
this wage level positions are expected to perform moderately complex tasks that require limited 
judgment. The advertised positions appear to be for more senior positions than the proffered 
position. More importantly, the petitioner has not sufficiently established that the primary duties 
and responsibilities of the advertised positions are parallel to the proffered position. 
Furthermore, with the exception of and 15 all of 
these employers would recognize a bachelor's degree in business as a qualifying degree for these 
13 http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com 
January 7, 2015). 
14 http://colleges.usnews. rankingsandreviews.corr 
2015). 
(last visited 
(last visited January 7, 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 18 
positions. As discussed earlier, although a general-purpose bachelor's degree, such as a 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. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoffat 147. 
Upon review of the documentation, the evidence of record does not establish that a requirement of a 
bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common (1) to the petitioner's 
industry; and (2) for positions within that industry that are both: (a) parallel to the proffered 
position, and (b) located in organizations that are similar to the petitioner. 
It must be noted that even if all of the job postings indicated that a requirement of a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar 
organizations (which they do not), the petitioner fails to demonstrate what statistically valid 
inferences, if any, can be drawn from the advertisements with regard to determining the common 
educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations. See generally 
Earl Babbie, The Practice of Social Research 186-228 (1995). Moreover, given that there is no 
indication that the advertisements were randomly selected, the validity of any such inferences could 
not be accurately determined even if the sampling unit were sufficiently large. See id. at 195-196 
(explaining that "[r]andom selection is the key to [the] process [of probability sampling]" and that 
"random selection offers access to the body of probability theory, which provides the basis for 
estimates of population parameters and estimates of error"). 
Thus, based upon a complete review of the record, we find that the evidence of record does not 
establish that a requirement for at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, 
is common (1) to the petitioner's industry; and (2) for positions within that industry that are both: 
(a) parallel to the proffered position, and (b) located in organizations that are similar to the 
petitioner. Thus, for the reasons discussed above, the petitioner has not satisfied the first alternative 
prong of 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
We will next consider the second alternative prong of 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2), which is 
satisfied if the petitioner shows that its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be 
performed only by an individual with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. 
In the instant case, the evidence of record does not credibly demonstrate relative complexity or 
uniqueness as aspects of the proffered position. Specifically, it is unclear how the media 
communications analyst position, as described, necessitates the theoretical and practical application of 
a body of highly specialized knowledge such that a person who has attained a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent is required to perform them. Rather, we find, that, as 
reflected in this decision's earlier quotation of duty descriptions from the record of proceeding, the 
15 
requires a master's degree but does not specify a specialty; and 
requires a bachelor's degree in the divergent specialties of graphic design, marketing, advertising, 
or a related discipline, along with training and experience in art, illustrations and/or graphic design. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 19 
evidence of record does not distinguish the proffered position from other positions falling within the 
"Market Research Analysts" occupational category, which, the Handb ook indicates, do not 
necessarily require a person with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent 
to enter those positions. 
More specifically, the petitioner did not demonstrate how the duties described require the 
theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge such that a 
bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is required to perform them. 
For instance, the petitioner did not submit information relevant to a detailed course of study leading 
to a specialty degree and did not establish how such a curriculum is necessary to perform the duties 
of the proffered position. While related courses may be beneficial, or even essential, in performing 
certain duties of a continuous quality improvement supervisor position, the petitioner has failed to 
demonstrate how an established curriculum of such courses leading to a baccalaureate or higher 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is required to perform the duties of the petitioner's 
proffered position. 
This is further eviden ced by the LCA submitted by the petitioner in support of the instant petition. 
Again, we incorporate by reference and reiterate our earlier discussion that the LCA indicates that 
the position is a low-level position relative to others within the occupation.16 Again, based upon the 
wage rate, the beneficiary is only required to perform moderately complex tasks that require limited 
judgment. Accordingly, given the Handbook's indication that typical positions located within the 
"Market Research Analysts" occupational category do not require at least a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty, or the equivalent, for entry, it is not credible that a position involving limited 
exercise of judgment would have such a requirement.17 
16 
Again, the Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance (available at http://www.foreignlaborcert. 
doleta.gov/ pdf/NPWHC_Guidance_Revised_11_2009.pdf (last visited February 4, 2015)) issued by DOL 
states the following with regard to Level II wage rates: 
Level ll (qualified) wage rates are assigned to job offers for qualified employees who have 
attained, either through education or experience, a good understanding of the occupation. 
They perform moderately complex tasks that require limited ju dgment. An indicator that the 
job request warrants a wage determination at Level II would be a requirement for years of 
education and/or experience that are generally required as described in the O*N ET Job 
Zones. 
Again, the proposed duties' level of complexity, uniqueness, and specialization, as well as the level of 
independent judgment and occupational understanding required to perform them, are questionable, as the 
petitioner submitted an LCA certified for a Level II position. In accordance with the relevant DOL explanatory 
information on wage levels, by submitting an LCA with a Level II wage rate, the petitioner effectively attests 
that the beneficiary is only required to perform moderately complex tasks that require only limited judgment. 
17 Any such assertion would also be undermined by counsel's own indication that a non-specific bachelor's 
degree in "business" would suffice. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 20 
Without further evidence, it is simply not credible that the petitioner's proffered position is complex 
or unique as such a position would likely be classified at a higher-level, such as a Level IV (fully 
competent) position, requiring a significantly higher prevailing wage. For instance, a Level IV 
(fully competent) position is designated by DOL for employees who "use advanced skills and 
diversified knowledge to solve unusual and complex problems. 
"18 
Moreover, the description of the duties does not specifically identify any tasks that are so complex 
or unique that only a specifically degreed individual could perform them. The record lacks 
sufficient probative evidence to distinguish the proffered position as more complex than or unique 
from other positions that can be performed by persons without at least a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
Finally, we observe that the petitioner has indicated that the beneficiary's educational background 
makes her qualified for the proffered position. However, the test to establish a position as a 
specialty occupation is not the skill set or education of a proposed beneficiary, but whether the 
position itself requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge obtained by at least baccalaureate-level knowledge in a specialized area. In the instant 
case, the petitioner does not establish which of the proposed duties, if any, would render the 
proffered position so complex or unique as to be distinguishable from those of similar but non­
degreed or non-specialty degreed employment. Again, the petitioner did not demonstrate 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. 
For all of these reasons, it cannot be concluded that the evidence of record satisfies the second 
alternative prong of 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii )(A)(2). 
The third criterion of 8 C.P.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. We 
normally review the petitioner's past recruiting and hiring practices, as well as information 
regarding employees who previously held the position. 
To merit approval of the petition under this criterion, the record must establish that the imposition 
of a degree requirement by the petitioner is not merely a matter of preference for high-caliber 
candidates but is necessitated by performance requirements of the position. In the instant case, the 
record does not establish a prior history of recruiting and hiring for the proffered position only 
persons with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
18 For additional information regarding wage levels as defined by DOL, 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_ 
11_2009.pdf. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 21 
We note that the petitioner claims repeatedly that the duties of the proffered position can only be 
employed by a degreed individual. While a petitioner may believe or otherwise assert that a 
proffered position requires a degree in a specific specialty, that opinion alone without corroborating 
evidence cannot establish the position as a specialty occupation. Were USCIS limited solely to 
reviewing a petitioner's claimed self-imposed requirements, then any individual with a bachelor's 
degree could be brought to the United States to perform any occupation as long as the employer 
artificially created a token degree requirement, whereby all individuals employed in a particular 
position possessed a baccalaureate or higher degree in the specific specialty or its equivalent. See 
Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F. 3d at 387. In other words, if a petitioner's degree requirement is only 
symbolic and the proffered position does not in fact require such a specialty degree or its equivalent 
to perform its duties, the occupation would not meet the statutory or regulatory definition of a 
specialty occupation. See section 214(i)(1) of the Act; 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) (defining the term 
"specialty occupation"). The record does not contain documentary evidence demonstrating a hiring 
history by the petitioner. As the record of proceeding does not demonstrate that the petitioner 
normally requires at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent for the 
proffered position, it does not satisfy 8 C.P.R.§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3). 
Next, we find that the evidence of record does not satisfy the criterion at 8 C.P.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4), which requires the petitioner to establish that the nature of the proffered 
position's duties is so specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform them is usually 
associated with the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in the specific specialty or its 
equivalent. 
Again, relative specialization and complexity have not been sufficiently developed by the petitioner 
as an aspect of the proffered position's duties. In other words, the proposed duties have not been 
described with sufficient specificity to show that their nature is more specialized and complex than 
market research analyst positions whose duties are not of a nature so specialized and complex that 
their performance requires knowledge usually associated with a degree in a specifiC specialty. In 
reviewing the record of proceeding under this criterion, we reiterate our earlier discussion regarding 
the Handb ook's entries for positions falling within the "Market Research Analysts" occupational 
category. Again, the Handboo k does not indicate that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or 
the equivalent, is a standard, minimum requirement to perform the duties of such positions (to the 
contrary, it indicates precisely the opposite), and the record indicates no factors that would elevate 
the duties proposed for the beneficiary above those discussed for similar positions in the Handbook. 
With regard to the specific duties of the position proffered here, we find that the record of 
proceeding lacks sufficient, credible evidence establishing that they are so specialized and complex 
that the knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with the attainment of a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or the equivalent. 
Furthermore, there is the matter of the LC A. We incorporate our earlier discussion regarding the 
wage-level designation on the LCA, which is appropriate for duties whose nature is less complex 
and specialized than required to satisfy this criterion. We find that both on its own terms and also in 
comparison with the two higher wage-levels that can be designated in an LCA, by the submission of 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 22 
an LCA certified for a wage-level II, the petitioner effectively attests that the proposed duties are of 
relatively low complexity as compared to others within the same occupational category. 
As earlier noted, the pertinent guidance from DOL, at page 7 of its Prevailing Wage Determination 
Policy Guidance describes Level II wage-level as follows: 
Level II (qualified) wage rates are assigned to job offers for qualified employees who 
have attained, either through education or experience, a good understanding of the 
occupation. They perform moderately complex tasks that require limited judgment. 
An indicator that the job request warrants a wage determination at Level II would be 
a requirement for years of education and/or experience that are generally required as 
described in the O*N ET Job Zones.19 
The above descriptive summary indicates that even this wage level is appropriate for only 
"moderately complex tasks that require limited judgment." The fact that this Level II wage-rate 
itself indicates performance of only "moderately complex tasks that require limited judgment," is 
very telling with regard to the relatively low level of complexity imputed to the proffered position 
by virtue of the petitioner 's wage-rate designation. 
Further, we note the relatively low level of complexity that even this Level II wage-level reflects 
when compared with the two still-higher LCA wage levels, neither of which was designated on the 
LCA submitted to support this petition. 
The aforementioned Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance describes the Level III wage 
designation as follows: 
I d. 
Level III (experienced) wage rates are assigned to job offers for experienced 
employees who have a sound understanding of the occupation and have attained, either 
through education or experience, special skills or knowledge. They perform tasks that 
require exercising judgment and may coordinate the activities of other staff. They may 
have supervisory authority over those staff. A requirement for years of experience or 
educational degrees that are at the higher ranges indicated in the O*N ET Job Zones 
would be indicators that a Level III wage should be considered. 
Frequently, key words in the job title can be used as indicators that an employer's job 
offer is for an experienced worker. ... 
19 U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance, 
Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta. 
gov/pdf/NPWHC_Guidance_Revised_11_2009.pdf (last visited February 4, 2015). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 23 
The Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance describes the Level IV wage designation as 
follows: 
/d. 
Level IV (fully competent) wage rates are assigned to job offers for competent 
employees who have sufficient experience in the occupation to plan and conduct 
work requiring judgment and the independent evaluation, selection, modification, and 
application of standard procedures and techniques. Such employees use advanced 
skills and diversified knowledge to solve unusual and complex problems. These 
employees receive only technical guidance and their work is reviewed only for 
application of sound judgment and effectiveness in meeting the establishment's 
procedures and expectations. They generally have management and/or supervisory 
responsibilities. 
As already noted, by virtue of this submission, the petitioner effectively attested to DOL that the 
proffered position is a low-level position relative to others within the same occupation, and that, as 
clear by comparison with DOL's instructive comments about the next higher level (Level III), the 
proffered position does not involve "a sound understanding of the occupation," "tasks that require 
exercising judgment," or "supervisory authority." 
For all of these reasons, the evidence in the record of proceeding fails to establish that the proposed 
duties meet the specialization and complexity threshold at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)( 4). 
As the evidence of record does not satisfy at least one of the criteria at 8 C.P.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), it cannot be found that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. 
Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed and the petition will be denied on this basis. 
V. CONCLUSION AND ORDER 
As set forth above, we agree with the director's findings that the evidence of record does not 
demonstrate that the proffered position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. 
Accordingly, the director's decision will not be disturbed.20 
In visa petition proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration 
benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Ma tter of Otiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 
(BIA 2013). Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied. 
20 
As the grounds discussed above are dispositive of the petitioner's eligibility for the benefit sought in this 
matter, we will not address and will instead reserve our determination on the additional issues and 
deficiencies that we observe in the record of proceeding with regard to the approval of the H-lB petition.