dismissed H-1B Case: Medicine

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 7141901 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : FEB. 13, 2020 
The Petitioner, a privately-owned family medical office, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary 
as a part-time "office manager" under the H-1 B nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(B)(i)(b), 8 U.S .C. § 1101 
(a)(l5)(H)(i)(h). 
The Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. The Director reopened the case upon 
the Petitioner's motion and subsequently denied the petition once again. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and contends that the petition should be 
approved. 
Upon de nova review , we will dismiss the appeal. 1 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
Section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1184(i)(l), defines the term "specialty occupation" as an 
occupation that requires: 
(A) theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, 
and 
(B) attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its 
equivalent) as a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) largely restates this statutory definition, but adds a non­
exhaustive list of fields of endeavor. In addition, the regulations provide that the proffered position 
must meet one of the following criteria to qualify as a specialty occupation: 
1 A petitioner must establish that it meets each eligibility requirement of the benefit sought by a preponderance of the 
evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I& N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). 
(]) A baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry into the particular position; 
(2) The degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among 
similar organizations or, in the alternative, an employer may show that its 
particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an 
individual with a degree; 
(3) The employer normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the position; or 
( 4) The nature of the specific duties [is] so specialized and complex that knowledge 
required to perform the duties is usually associated with the attainment of a 
baccalaureate or higher degree. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). We construe the term "degree" to mean not just any baccalaureate or 
higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proposed position. See Royal 
Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d 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"). 
II. LABOR CONDITION APPLICATION 
As a preliminary matter, we conclude that the certified labor condition application (LCA)2 submitted 
in support of the H-lB petition, does not correspond to and support to the petition. The purpose of the 
LCA wage requirement is "to protect U.S. workers' wages and eliminate any economic incentive or 
advantage in hiring temporary foreign workers." 3 It also serves to protect H-lB workers from wage 
abuses. A petitioner submits the LCA to the Department of Labor (DOL) to demonstrate that it will 
pay an H-1 B worker the higher of either the prevailing wage for the occupational classification in the 
area of employment or the actual wage paid by the employer to other employees with similar duties, 
experience, and qualifications. 4 While DOL certifies the LCA, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (USCIS) determines whether the LCA's content corresponds with the H-lB petition. 5 
To assess whether the wage level stated in the LCA corresponds to and supports the petition, we apply 
DOL's guidance, which provides a five step process for determining the appropriate wage level. 6 DOL 
guidance states that wage levels should be determined only after selecting the most relevant 
2 A petitioner submits the LCA to DOL to demonstrate that it will pay an H-1 B worker the higher of either the prevailing 
wage for the occupational classification in the area of employment or the actual wage paid by the employer to other 
employees with similar duties, experience, and qualifications. Section 212(n)(l) of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 655.73l(a). 
3 See Labor Condition Applications and Requirements for Employers Using Nonimmigrants on H-lB Visas in Specialty 
Occupations and as Fashion Models; Labor Certification Process for Permanent Employment of Aliens in the United 
States, 65 Fed. Reg. 80,110, 80,110-11 (proposed Dec. 20, 2000) (to be codified at 20 C.F.R. pts. 655-56). 
4 Section 212(n)(l) of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 655.73l(a). 
5 See 20 C.F.R. § 655.705(b) ("DHS determines whether the petition is supp01ted by an LCA which corresponds with the 
petition ... "). 
6 U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. 
Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009) (DOL guidance). 
2 
occupational code classification. Then, a prevailing wage determination is made by selecting one of 
four wage levels for an occupation based on a comparison of the employer's job requirements to the 
occupational requirements, including tasks, knowledge, skills, and specific vocational preparation 
( education, training and experience) generally required for acceptable performance in that 
occupation. Factors to be considered when determining the wage level for a position include the 
complexity of the job duties, as well as the levels ofjudgment, supervision, and understanding required 
to perform the job duties. 
On the LCA submitted in support of the H-1B petition, the Petitioner designated the proffered position 
under the occupational category "Administrative Services Managers" corresponding to the Standard 
Occupational Classification (SOC) code 11-3011 at a Level I wage rate. 7 DOL guidance states that 
a Level I ( entry) wage rate is generally appropriate for positions for which the Petitioner expects the 
Beneficiary to have a basic understanding of the occupation. 
Step three of the DOL guidance concerns education requirements. Here, the Petitioner indicated that 
the proffered position requires a bachelor's degree. The DOL Occupational Information Network 
(O*NET) for "Administrative Services Managers" listed as SOC code 11-3011.00 is the SOC code 
designated by the Petitioner on the LCA. This designation indicates that the occupation is a Job Zone 
Three 8 position with a specific vocational preparation (SVP) range of 6 < 7. 9 An education 
requirement of a bachelor's degree is more than that required for Job Zone Three and SVP range of 
6<7 occupations and should have resulted in at least a one level increase in the wage. 
Therefore, the Petitioner's requirement of a bachelor's degree does not appear to be reflected in the 
wage level chosen by the Petitioner on the LCA. 10 The stated requirement in the H-1B petition for a 
bachelor's degree for this position appears to be materially inconsistent with the certification of the 
LCA for a Level I position. The record of proceedings as currently constituted is therefore not 
sufficient to establish that the LCA corresponds to and supports the H-1B petition, as required, and 
the petition cannot be approved for this reason alone. 
Having reached this preliminary conclusion, we will now address the basis upon which the Director 
denied this petition: her determination that the proffered position is not a specialty occupation. 
7 The Petitioner submitted evidence within its motion to reopen and on appeal which indicates that the Petitioner also 
classifies the proffered position as a "Medical and Health Service Managers" listed as SOC code 11-9111. This SOC code 
change undermines the Petitioner's claims as to the substantive nature of the proffered position. It is unclear if the proffered 
position has materially changed since the initial petition filing or whether the LCA was certified for an incorrect SOC 
code, but in either case, the LCA does not correspond to the petition. 
8 A Job Zone Three designation states that "most occupations in this zone require training in vocational schools, related 
on-the-job experience, or an associate's degree." 
9 This SVP is defined as "[o]ver 1 year up to and including 2 years." https://www.onetonline.org/help/online/svp 
10 A petitioner must distinguish its proffered position from others within the occupation through the proper wage level 
designation to indicate factors such as complexity of the job duties, the level of judgment, the amount and level of 
supervision, and the level of understanding required to perform the job duties. Through the wage level, the Petitioner 
reflects the job requirements, experience, education, special skills/other requirements and supervisory duties. See DOL 
guidance. 
3 
III. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION 
In the H-lB petition, the Petitioner stated that the Beneficiary will serve as an "office manager" 
working part-time in the Petitioner's medical office. For the reasons set out below, we have 
determined that the proffered position does not qualify as a specialty occupation. 11 Specifically, we 
conclude that two separate factors independently bar approval of this petition: (1) the Petitioner's lack 
of a requirement for a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or the equivalent; and (2) the 
Petitioner's failure to satisfy at least one of the four regulatory specialty-occupation criteria 
enumerated at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l)-(4). 12 
A. Lack of a Requirement for a Bachelor's Degree in a Specific Specialty, or the Equivalent 
First, the petition is not approvable because the Petitioner's claimed entry requirement of at least a 
bachelor's degree, or equivalent, in business management without more, is inadequate to establish that 
the proposed position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 13 
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 management, without farther specification, does not establish the position as a 
specialty occupation. 14 To prove that a job requires the theoretical and practical application of a body 
of highly specialized knowledge as required by section 2 l 4(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 stated above, we interpret 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. We have consistently 
stated that, although a general-purpose bachelor's degree, such as a degree in business management, 
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. 15 
Again, the Petitioner asserts that the duties of the proffered position can be performed with only a 
general-purpose degree in the field of business management. 16 That statement alone indicates that the 
11 The Petitioner submitted documentation in support of the H-lB petition, including evidence regarding the proffered 
position and its business operations. While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and 
considered each one. 
12 Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap, we will address each of the criteria individually. 
13 According to the Petitioner's initial supp01t letter, the proffered position requires a bachelor's degree in business 
management, sociology, or a related field. Subsequently, the Petitioner stated that its minimum requirement is a bachelor's 
degree in business management or a related field with no mention of sociology. The inconsistent educational requirements 
raise questions as to the credibility of the overall petition. 
14 Cf Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 T&N Dec. 558, 560 (Comm'r 1988). 
15 Cf Royal Siam Corp .. 484 F.3d at 147. 
16 The Petitioner states that it will accept either a degree in business management or sociology in one iteration and simply 
business management in another iteration. The Petitioner has not stated that it requires the business management degree 
to be specialized. 
4 
proffered position is not in fact a specialty occupation. The Director's decision must therefore be 
affirmed and the appeal dismissed on this basis alone. 
B. The Specialty-Occupation Criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(])-(4) 
Even if we set that issue aside, we would still conclude that the proffered position is not a specialty 
occupation because the evidence of record does not satisfy at least one of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 
214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)( 1)-( 4). 
1. First Criterion 
We turn first to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(]), which requires that a baccalaureate or 
higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for entry 
into the particular position. We recognize DOL's Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) as an 
authoritative source on the duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it 
addresses. 17 
On the LCA submitted in support of the H-lB petition, the Petitioner designated the proffered position 
under the occupational category "Administrative Services Managers" corresponding to the SOC code 
11-3011. The Handbook's subchapter entitled "How to Become an Administrative Services Manager," 
states, in pertinent part, that administrative services managers typically have a bachelor's degree in 
business, engineering, facility management, or information management. 18 However, the Handbook 
further states that some administrative services managers may be able to enter the occupation with a high 
school diploma. The Handbook, therefore, does not support the assertion that at least a bachelor's degree 
in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for these positions. 
The Petitioner references DOL' s O*NET summary report for "Medical and Health Service Managers" 
listed as SOC code 11-9111.00 on its motion to reopen and within its appeal. However, as previously 
stated, the LCA has been certified for "Administrative Services Managers" listed as SOC code 11-3011. 
Because the Petitioner must establish that all eligibility requirements for the immigration benefit have 
been satisfied from the time of the filing and continuing through adjudication, 19 a visa petition may 
not be approved at a future date after the Petitioner or the Beneficiary becomes eligible under a new 
set of facts. 20 As such, eligibility for the benefit sought must be assessed and weighed based on the 
facts as they existed at the time the instant petition was filed. In order for a petitioner to comply with 
8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l) and USCIS to perform its regulatory duties under 20 C.F.R. § 655.705(b), a 
17 We do not maintain that the Handbook is the exclusive source ofrelevant information. That is, the occupational category 
designated by the Petitioner is considered as an aspect in establishing the general tasks and responsibilities of a proffered 
position, and we regularly review the Handbook on the duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of 
occupations that it addresses. To satisfy the first criterion, however, the burden ofproofremains on the Petitioner to submit 
sufficient evidence to support a finding that its particular position would normally have a minimum, specialty degree 
requirement, or its equivalent, for entry. 
18 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Administrative Services Managers, 
https://www.bls.gov/ooh/management/administrative-services-managers.htm#tab-4 (last visited Feb. 12, 2020). 
19 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(6)(1). 
20 See Matter of Michelin Tire Corp., 17 T&N Dec. 248 (Reg'l Comm'r 1978). 
5 
petitioner must file an amended or new petition, along with a new LCA certified by DOL, in order to 
capture any material changes in terms or conditions of employment or the beneficiary's eligibility. 
As such, we will limit our consideration to the DOL's O*NET summary report for "Administrative 
Services Managers" listed as SOC code 11-3011.00. 21 The summary report provides general information 
regarding the occupation; however, it does not support the Petitioner's assertion regarding the educational 
requirements for these positions.22 For example, the SVP rating, which is defined as "the amount of 
lapsed time required by a typical worker to learn the techniques, acquire the information, and develop the 
facility needed for average performance in a specific job-worker situation," cited within O*NET's Job 
Zone designates this position as having an SVP 6 < 7. This indicates that the occupation requires "over 
1 year up to and including 2 years" of training. 23 While the SVP rating provides the total number of years 
of vocational preparation required for a particular position, it is important to note that it does not describe 
how those years are to be divided among training, formal education, and experience - and it does not 
specify the particular type of degree, if any, that a position would require. The O*NET summary report 
for this occupation also does not specify that a bachelor's degree is required, but instead states, "most 
occupations in this zone require training in vocational schools, related on-the-job experience, or an 
associate's degree." Similar to the SVP rating, the Job Zone Three designation does not indicate that any 
academic credentials for Job Zone Three occupations must be directly related to the duties performed. 
Further, we note that the summary report provides the educational requirements of "respondents," but 
does not account for 100% of the "respondents." The respondents' positions within the occupation are 
not distinguished by career level ( e.g., entry-level, mid-level, senior-level). Additionally, the graph in the 
summary report does not indicate that the "education level" for the respondents must be in a specific 
specialty. The survey indicates that 24% of "respondents" claim to hold a bachelor's degree. However, 
the same survey indicates that compared to those bachelor's degree respondents, even more respondents, 
34%, reported possessing at most a high school diploma or equivalent, 13% reported possessing at most 
a post-secondary certificate, and further, the education level for 29% ofrespondents remains unaccounted. 
Regardless, a requirement for a bachelor's degree alone is not sufficient. 24 Instead, we construe the term 
"degree" to mean not just any baccalaureate or higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is directly 
related to the proposed position. 25 O*NET, therefore, also does not support the assertion that at least a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for these 
positions. 
21 Even if we were to examine the proffered position under SOC code 11-9111.00, O*NET does not establish that the 
proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. The same general analysis that we apply to SOC code 11-3011.00 
also applies to the Job Zone and SVP rating set forth under SOC code 11-9111.00 in that the job summary report does not 
(1) describe how the years of preparation are to be divided among training, formal education, and experience; (2) specify the 
particular type of degree, if any. that a position would require; or (3) state that the academic credentials must be directly related 
to the duties performed. 
22 For additional information. see the O*NET Online Help webpage available at http://www.onetonline.org/help/ 
online/svp. 
23 This training may be acquired in a school, work, military, institutional, or vocational environment. Specific vocational 
training includes: vocational education, apprenticeship training, in-plant training, on-the-job training, and essential 
experience in other jobs. 
24 Nor is it apparent whether these credentials were prerequisites to these individuals' hiring. 
25 See Royal Siam COip., 484 F.3d at 147 (describing "a degree requirement in a specific specialty" as "one that relates 
directly to the duties and responsibilities of a particular position"). 
6 
The record lacks sufficient probative evidence to support a finding that the proffered position is one for 
which a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum 
requirement for entry. For the aforementioned reasons, the Petitioner has not met its burden to establish 
that the particular position offered in this matter requires a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific 
specialty, or its equivalent, directly related to its duties in order to perform those tasks. Thus, the 
Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(I). 
2. Second Criterion 
The second criterion presents two, alternative prongs: 'The degree requirement is common to the industry 
in parallel positions among similar organizations or, in the alternative, an employer may show that its 
particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with a degree[.]" 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong casts its gaze upon the common 
industry practice, while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the Petitioner's specific position. 
a. First Prong 
To satisfy this first prong of the second criterion, the Petitioner must establish that the "degree 
requirement" (i.e., a requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent) 
is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. 
We generally consider the following sources of evidence to determine if there is such a common degree 
requirement: whether the Handbook reports that the industry requires a degree; whether the industry's 
professional association has made a degree a minimum entry requirement; and whether letters or 
affidavits from firms or individuals in the industry attest that such firms "routinely employ and recruit 
only degreed individuals." 26 
The Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one for which the Handbook ( or other 
independent, authoritative sources) reports an industry-wide requirement for at least a bachelor's degree 
in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. Thus, we incorporate by reference the previous discussion on the 
matter. 
The Petitioner submitted job vacancy announcements for our consideration under this prong. To be 
relevant for consideration, the job vacancy announcements must advertise "parallel positions," and the 
announcements must have been placed by organizations that (1) conduct business in the Petitioner's 
industry and (2) are also "similar" to the Petitioner. These job vacancy announcements do not satisfy that 
threshold. Upon review of the documents, we conclude that the Petitioner's reliance on the job 
announcements is misplaced. 
We will first consider whether the advertised job opportunities could be considered "parallel positions." 
As noted, the Petitioner attested to DOL that the proffered position is a Level I, entry-level position. 
However, almost all of the advertised positions require significant work experience, which suggests that 
these positions may be more senior than the proffered position. Most of the advertised positions require 
26 See Shanti, Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151, 1165 (D. Minn. 1999) (quoting Hird/Blaker Co1p. v. Sava, 712 F. Supp. 
1095, 1102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989) (considering these "factors" to inform the commonality of a degree requirement)). 
7 
a bachelor's degree plus two to ten years of additional experience spread out between healthcare-related 
experience and supervisory or management experience. Moreover, most of the positions are full-time, 
whereas the proffered position is part-time. Thus, the Petitioner has not sufficiently established that the 
primary duties and responsibilities of the advertised positions parallel those of the proffered position. 
Nor does the record contain documentary evidence sufficient to establish that these job vacancy 
announcements were placed by companies that (1) conduct business in the Petitioner's industry and (2) 
are also "similar" to the Petitioner. Here, the Petitioner is a three-employee medical practice 27 whereas 
many of the advertisements appear to have been placed by large medical clinics or for facilities that have 
offices across multiple states. The Petitioner did not supplement the record of proceedings to establish 
that these advertising organizations are similar to it. 
For all of these reasons, the Petitioner has not established that these job vacancy announcements are 
relevant. Even if that threshold had been met, we would still conclude that they did not satisfy this prong 
of the second criterion, as they do not indicate that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or the 
equivalent, is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. Very few 
postings indicate that at least a bachelor's degree in a directly related specific specialty ( or its equivalent) 
is required. 28 For instance, some of the advertised positions state that any bachelor's degree or a 
bachelor's degree in business is acceptable, which, as previously discussed is not considered to be a 
requirement for a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. Others employers accept experience in lieu 
of education in whole or in part, requiring no degree at all. Overall, the job postings suggest, at best, that 
although a bachelor's degree is sometimes required for these positions, a bachelor's degree in a spec[fic 
specialty ( or its equivalent) is not. 29 
As alternative evidence for our consideration under this and the other criteria, the Petitioner submits 
various articles concerning the medical profession. We acknowledge the Petitioner's information on 
the importance of the profession and the increase in demand upon physicians, however, neither this 
information, nor the relative importance of the proffered position within the overall industry itself, 
establishes that the duties of the proffered position qualify as a specialty occupation under any of the 
statutory or regulatory criteria. Furthermore, though helpful in providing general information, the reports 
concerning the role of medical office managers do not establish an industry standard. In fact, the Verywell 
Health report undermines the Petitioner's claim that the proffered position is specialized. The article 
states that education requirements for medical office managers vary by employer and that most employers 
27 Per the Petitioner's claim on the Form T-129 at the time of filing the petition. 
28 As discussed. the degree requirement set by the statutory and regulatory rramework of the H-1 B program is not just a 
bachelor's or higher degree, but a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the duties of the 
position. Section 214(i)(l)(b) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). See Royal Siam Corp., 484 F.3d at 147. 
29 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 has not demonstrated 
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. Sec 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"). 
8 
prefer a bachelor's degree. Even setting aside the fact that a preference for a degree is not a degree 
requirement, the article fails to articulate a specific field for the stated bachelor's degree. 
As the documentation does not establish that the Petitioner has met this prong of the regulations, further 
analysis regarding the specific information contained in each of the job postings, articles, and reports is 
not necessary. 30 That is, not every deficit of every piece of evidence has been addressed. 
The Petitioner has not provided sufficient probative evidence to establish that a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent, is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar 
organizations. Thus, the Petitioner has not satisfied the first alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 2 l 4.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2). 
b. Second Prong 
The second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) 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. 
The Petitioner stated that the duties of the position are complex due to the fact that they involve human 
beings who need medical assistance and not mere commodities and merchandise. However, even if 
true, this does not sufficiently develop or explain relative complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the 
proffered position. That is, the Petitioner has not explained in detail how the tasks listed below require 
the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge. 
• Oversee the general operations of the medical office with concentration on analyzing key 
processes to improve outcomes in the areas of total customer experience, operational efficiency 
and optimal resource utilization 
• Lead in developing new client-base as well ensuring that existing ones are maintained for 
continued services 
• Be on top of our relationship with Medicaid, Medicare and other insurance affiliates including 
but not limited to obtaining approval and clearances for patients and billing processes and 
relevant documentation 
• Assist with accounts payable and accounts receivable processing 
• Administer efficient patient scheduling and appointments for treatment and other relevant 
medical service 
• Monitor office supply acquisitions and contact affiliated firms for timely and cost-effective 
purchase transactions 
• Responsible for ensuring that [the] medical practice's standards for customer service, 
productivity, and efficiency are met 
• Responsible in securing and protecting the integrity of every information regarding [the] 
medical practice from breach and intrusions 
30 The Petitioner did not provide any independent evidence of how representative the job postings are of the particular 
advertising employers' recruiting history for the type of job advertised. As the advertisements are only solicitations for 
hire, they are not evidence of the actual hiring practices of these employers. 
9 
Not only does the Petitioner fail to explain how these duties require specialized knowledge, many of 
the duties themselves are described in vague and general terms, not allowing us to understand what 
the Beneficiary will actually be doing when carrying out the undefined tasks. For instance, we have 
no information on what the Beneficiary will do to "[l]ead in developing new client-base" or what 
"ensuring that [the] medical practice standards ... are met" actually involves. 
Once again, neither the importance of the Petitioner's industry overall, nor of the proffered position within 
the Petitioner's business, is sufficient to establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty 
occupation. The Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary is well qualified for the position, and references 
her qualifications. However, the test to establish a position as a specialty occupation is not the education 
or experience of a proposed beneficiary, but whether the position itself requires at least a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 31 
The Petitioner did not sufficiently develop relative complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the duties of 
the position, and it did not identify any tasks that are so complex or unique that only a specifically degreed 
individual could perform them. Accordingly, the Petitioner has not satisfied the second alternative prong 
of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2). 
3. Third Criterion 
The third criterion of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) entails an employer demonstrating that it normally 
requires a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, for the position. As this appears 
to be the only time the Petitioner has hired for the proffered position, it did not submit evidence of 
previous or current employees who have served in the proffered position. Thus, the Petitioner has not 
satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3). 
4. Fourth Criterion 
The fourth criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) requires a petitioner to establish that the nature of 
the specific duties is so specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform them is usually 
associated with the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
For the same reasons we discussed under the second prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2), we 
conclude that the Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one with duties sufficiently 
specialized and complex to satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). We incorporate our earlier 
discussion and analysis on this matter. 
31 We are required to follow long-standing legal standards and determine first, whether the proffered position qualifies as 
a specialty occupation, and second, whether the beneficiary was qualified for the position at the time the nonimmigrant 
visa petition was filed. Cf Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 T&N Dec. 558, 560 (Comm'r 1988) ('The facts of a 
beneficiary's background only come at issue after it is found that the position in which the petitioner intends to employ 
him falls within [a specialty occupation]."). Because the Petitioner has not established that the proffered position qualifies 
as a specialty occupation, we need not address the Beneficiary's qualifications. However, we wish to inform the Petitioner 
that the academic equivalency evaluation provided by the Petitioner is insufficient to establish that the Beneficiary holds 
the academic equivalent of any U.S. degree as the equivalency is unsigned and contains no information concerning the 
credentials and qualifications of the evaluator. 
10 
Because the Petitioner has not satisfied one of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), it has not 
demonstrated that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
IV. CONCLUSION 
The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered an independent and 
alternative basis for the decision. In visa petition proceedings, it is a petitioner's burden to establish 
eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. The Petitioner 
has not met that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
11