dismissed H-1B Case: Pharmaceutical Research

(b)(6)
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 
DATE: MAR 2 0 2ut5 OFFICE: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER FILE: 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10l(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § llOl(a)(lS)(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 Jaw 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.F.R. § 103.5. Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Thank you, 
� Ron Rosenberg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director (hereinafter "director") denied the nonimmigrant visa 
petition, and the matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will 
be dismissed. The petition will be denied. 
On the Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I-129), the petitioner describes itself as a one­
employee business engaged in "Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life 
Sciences" established in In order to employ the beneficiary in what it designates as a 
"Business Development Manager" position at an annual salary of $60,902, the petitioner seeks to 
classify him as a nonimmigrant worker m 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, finding that the evidence fails to establish that the proffered position 
is a specialty occupation. The petitioner now files this appeal, asserting that the director's decision 
was erroneous. The petitioner submits a brief and additional evidence in support of the appeal. 
The record of proceeding contains the following: (1) the Form I-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 Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B), 
and supporting documentation. We have reviewed the record in its entirety before issuing our 
decision. 
Upon review of the entire record of proceeding, we find that the director did not err in denying this 
petition. The appeal will be dismissed, and the petition will be denied. 
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY 
As noted above, the petitioner describes itself as a one-employee "Research and Development in the 
Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences" company established in In a letter dated March 20, 
2014 submitted in support of the petition, the petitioner described its main business objective as "t o 
carry on business of contract research and testing services to food, pharmaceutical, chemical, textile, 
metallurgical and environmental industry," with an emphasis on "provid[ing] [the] pharmaceutical 
industry with testing and Consultancy services for product development, scale up, technology 
transfer and regulatory compliance." The petitioner stated that it seeks to employ the beneficiary as 
a business development manager with the following duties: 
His responsibilities will include the following: execute marketing plans and all 
aspects of marketing campaigns for [the petitioner's] businesses; support the 
implementation of the long term marketing strategy of [the petitioner's] businesses; 
develop and expand new business opportunities with prospective clients and 
established accounts; work closely with corporate directors, marketing d epartm en t, 
research and development department and other related contacts to ensure deadlines 
are met; evaluate program strategies on an ongoing basis by interpreting data, 
(b)(6)
Page 3 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
identifying trends, and making actionable recommendations for continual 
improvement of [the petitioner]; support the creation of marketing plans for [the 
petitioner's] businesses that include long term strategies, measurable objectives, 
Community Relations Plan and tactics; and perform other job related duties as 
assigned. 
As to the educational requirement of the proffered position, the petitioner stated: "This is a highly 
specialized and technical position requiring the theoretical and practical application of high I y 
specialized knowledge acquired only through the attainment of a bachelor's degree or foreign 
equivalent in Business Administration, Marketing, or related discipline." This letter was signed by 
identified as the petitioner's "President." 
The Labor Condition Application (LCA) submitted to support the visa pet1t10n states that the 
proffered position corresponds to Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code and occupation 
title "11-2021, Marketing Managers" from the Occupational Information Network (O*NET). The 
LCA further states that the proffered position is a Level I, entry-level, position, with a proffered 
wage of $60,902 per year. 
The petitioner also submitted, inter alia, its business plan, entitled "Detail Project Report" which 
discusses, in pertinent part, the petitioner's current and projected staffing. Specifically, the business 
plan identifies as the sole shareholder-emplo yee who will "look[] after" the "[r]outine 
operations of the laboratory." In addition, the business plan states that there will be an "Analytical 
Testing" department or unit which will be headed by a "Manager, Analytical Services" and "assisted 
by one [up to] five Scientists." The business plan further states that there will be "one person for 
business development." None of the prospective employees are identified. In another section 
discussing the company's projected costs for 2014 and 2015, the business plan lists salaries for one 
manager position and two unspecified positions. None of the three listed salaries match the 
proffered wage of $60,902 or identify the employee in each position. 
The petitioner submitted evidence that the beneficiary received a Master of Business Administration 
degree from the , Missouri. 
The petitioner submitted a letter addressed to the petitioner from confirming 
its intent to outsource analytical testing services from the petitioner "on the basis of [the petitioner's J 
stated plan of hiring chemists with experience and expertise in the field." 
The director issued an RFE requesting additional evidence that the proffered position qualifies for 
classification as a specialty occupation. In response, the petitioner submitted, inter alia, a letter 
dated July 21, 2014 reaffirming that the minimum educational requirement for the proffered position 
is "a bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent in Business Administration, Marketing, or related 
discipline." This letter was signed by who identifies herself as the "President." 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 4 
The petitioner also submitted another, more detailed description of the proffered position and its 
constituent duties. In pertinent part, the petitioner reaffirmed that the position will be 11 [ r ]responsible 
for executing Marketing Plans and all aspects of Marketing Campaigns, 11 and described the "Level of 
Responsibility" of the proffered position as "Mid level." The petitioner also provided the following 
list of duties, along with the percentages of time spent on each task: 
Marketing Management (50%) 
• Responsible to create a productive Marketing Plan for [the petitioner] to 
achieve monthly/yearly sales target. 
• Create and implement all Sales Promotional Plan to achieve sales target. 
• Responsible to build a long term business plan for [the petitioner] to meet the 
long term business goal. 
Customer Relationship Management (30%) 
• Identify new business opportunities for [the petitioner] and develop 
professional relationship with prospective customers. 
• Maintain and Expand business opportunities through Customer Relationship 
Management software. 
• Accountable to organize business meetings with prospective customers and 
understanding their needs. 
Project Data Management (1 5%) 
• Evaluate business goal strategies on an ongoing basis by identifying existing 
business trends. 
• Condu ct Customer Marketing Research and Business to Business Marketing 
Research to identify and assess how changing elements of the marketing mix 
impacts customer behavior. 
Relationship Management with other [company] Functions (5%) 
• Work closely with Corporate Directors, Research & Development department, 
Finance Department and other related contacts to ensure deadlines are met. 
In addition, the petitioner submitted several vacancy announcements placed by other companies. 
The director denied the petition, finding that the evidence failed to establish that the proffered 
position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. 
The petitioner filed the instant appeal. In its appeal brief, the petitioner stated that the proffered 
position requires at least a bachelor's degree in business administration and marketing. Later on in 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 5 
the same brief, the petitioner stated that the proffered position requires "a minimum educational 
requirement of a Bachelor's degree in business administration, consumer behavior, market research, 
communication." 
In support of the appeal, the petitioner submitted, inter alia, additional vacancy announcements 
which the petitioner characterized as from "similar organizations requir[ing] at least a bachelor's 
degree in business administration, marketing, sales, life sciences." 
The petitioner also submitted the chapter from the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL's) Occupational 
Outlook Handbook (Handbook) on "Advertising, Promotions, and Marketing Managers." 
Finally, the petitioner submitted an affidavit from , identified as the petitioner's President 
and CEO, attesting that the proffered position "requires a Bachelor's Degree in in [sic] a scientific, 
technical or business discipline." 
II. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION 
A The Law 
Section 21 4(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 11 84(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. § 21 4.2(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.F.R. § 21 4.2(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 mm1mum 
requirement for entry into the particular position; 
(b)(6)
Page 6 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
(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 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.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) but not the statutory or 
regulatory definition. See Defensor v. Meissner, 201 P.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). To avoid this 
result, 8 C.P.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.P.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(ii), U.S. Citizenship ·and Immigration Services (USCIS) consistently interprets the 
term "degree" in the criteria at 8 C.P.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 P.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 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 7 
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. 
B. Analysis 
Preliminarily, we find that the evidence of record does not consistently reflect the petitioner's 
minimum educational requirement for the proffered position. 
More specifically, the petitioner initially stated that the proffered position requires a minimum of 
"bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent in Business Administration, Marketing, or related 
discipline." However, on appeal the petitioner stated both that the proffered position requires "a 
minimum educational requirement of a Bachelor's degree in business administration, consumer 
behavior, market research, communication," and that it "requires a Bachelor's Degree in in [sic] a 
scientific, technical or business discipline." The petitioner has not provided an explanation 
reconciling its inconsistent statements. It is incumbent upon the petitioner to resolve any 
inconsistencies in the record by independent objective evidence. Any attempt to explain or 
reconcile such inconsistencies will not suffice unless the petitioner submits competent objective 
evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). 
If it is the petitioner's claim that the minimum educational requirement for the proffered position can 
be satisfied by an otherwise unspecified bachelor's degree in business or business administration, 
such a degree is insufficient to establish that the proffered 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 and closely to the position in question. Since there must be a 
close correlation between the required specialized studies and the position, the requirement of a 
degree with a generalized title, such as business administration, w ithou t further specification, does 
not establish the position as a specialty occupation. Cf. Matter of Michael Hertz Associates, 19 I&N 
Dec. 558 (Comm'r 1988). 
To prove that a job requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge as required by section 214(i)(l) of the Act, a petitioner must establish that the position 
requires the attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specialized field of study or its 
equivalent. As discussed supra, USCIS interprets the degree requirement at 8 C.F.K § 
214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to require a degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proposed 
position. 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. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 8 
See Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d at 147. 2 
The assertion that an otherwise unspecified bachelor's degree in business administration would be a 
sufficient educational qualification for the proffered position is tantamount to an admission that the 
proffered position does not require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its 
equivalent and does not, therefore, qualify as a specialty occupation position. On this basis alone, 
the petition could not be approved. 
Secondly, we find that the petitioner has not presented an accurate, credible description of the 
proffered position and its constituent job duties based upon the petitioner's operations at the time of 
filing. 
Most notably, the petitioner stated that the beneficiary will spend 50% of his time on "Marketing 
Management," and submitted an LCA certified for a position falling under the "Marketing 
Managers" occupational classification. Despite the petitioner's assertions that the beneficiary will be 
"managing" the marketing functions, however, the evidence of record reflects that the beneficiary 
will be "execut[ing] all aspects of marketing campaigns (emphasis added). "3 According to the 
Handbook's subchapter on "What Advertising, Promotions, and Marketing Managers Do," 
marketing managers direct and oversee the daily activities of marketing, advertising, and other 
staff. 4 Id. at http://www .bls.gov/ooh/management/advertising-promoti ons-and-marketing­
managers.htm#tab-2 (last visited March 4, 2015). The Handbook does not state that marketing 
2 Specifically, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit explained in Royal Siam that: 
/d. 
[t]he courts and the agency consistently have stated that, although a general-purpose 
bachelor's degree, such as a business administration degree, may be a legitimate prerequisite 
for a particular position, requiring such a degree, without more, will not justify the granting 
of a petition for an H-1B specialty occupation visa. See, e.g., Tapis lnt'l v. INS, 94 F.Supp.2d 
172, 175-76 (D.Mass.2000); Shanti, 36 F. Supp.2d at 1164-66; cf. Matter of Michael Hertz 
Assocs., 19 I & N Dec. 558, 560 ([Comm'r] 1988) (providing frequently cited analysis in 
connection with a conceptually similar provision). This is as it should be: elsewise, an 
employer could ensure the granting of a specialty occupation visa petition by the simple 
expedient of creating a generic (and essentially artificial) degree requirement. 
3 We note that the beneficiary will also be "implementing all sales plans (emphasis added)." 
4 We recognize the Handbook as an authoritative source on the duties and educational requirements of the wide 
variety of occupations that it addresses. The Handbook, which is available in printed form, may also be 
accessed on the Internet, at http://www.bls.gov/oco/. All our references to the Handbook are to the 2014-
2015 edition available online. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECfS!Olv 
Page 9 
managers execute the actual marketing activities which they direct and oversee. Also, the petitioner 
has not adequately explained how the beneficiary will be functioning as a marketing "manager" 
when in fact he is the sole employee executing all of the operational, day-to-day marketing 
activities. See Matter of Church Scientology International, 19 I&N Dec. 593, 604 (Comm'r 1988) 
(an employee who primarily performs the tasks necessary to produce a product or to provide 
services is not considered to be "primarily" employed in a managerial or executive capacity). 
As of the date of filing, the petitioning company has only one employee, the President/CEO, whose 
responsibilities will be to "[look] after" the "[r] outine operations of the laboratory." 5 The petitioner 
does not claim that it has or will hire any marketing or related personnel to assist the beneficiary. 
As noted above, the· petitioner expressly states that the beneficiary will perform "all" of the 
marketing functions. In addition, the business plan states that the anticipated staffing will consist of: 
(1) a Manager, Analytical Services; (2) one to five scientists; and (3) one person for "business 
development, " which we assume refers to the beneficiary.6 Again, none of these anticipated 
personnel consist of marketing personnel.7 
Considering the petitioner's current staffing, the evidence of record fails to establish that the 
petitioner will employ the beneficiary in the manner asserted. It is reasonable to assume that the 
size of an employer's business has or could have an impact on the claimed duties of a particular 
position. See EG Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a/ Mexican Wholesale Grocery v Department of Homeland 
Security, 467 F. Supp. 2d 728 (E.D. Mich. 2006). Thus, the size of a petitioner may be considered 
as a component of the nature of the petitioner's business, as the size impacts upon the actual duties 
of a particular position. 
5 The petitioner's initial documentation identifies as its President, sole shareholder, and sole 
employee. However, subsequent documentation identifies as the petitioner's "President" and 
"CEO." The petitioner has not provided an explanation for this apparent change in personnel. 
6 The petitioner's anticipated staffing is somewhat unclear. According to the petitio ner's business plan, the 
petitioner plans on employing a total of three paid employees in its first two years of operations: (1) a 
Manager position at a wage of $80,000; (2) an unspecified second position at a wage of $65,000; and (3) an 
unspecified third position at a wage of $50,000. The petitioner has not established that any of these three 
positions refers to the proffered position, which is being offered at a wage of $60,902. We note the 
likelihood that the two unspecified positions will be scientist positions, considering that the petitioner's 
contract with is contingent upon the petitioner's hiring of " chemists" in the plural. 
7 Regardless, even if the petitioner were to establish that it would hire marketing and sales staff to assist the 
beneficiary in the future, the petitioner cannot establish eligibility based on spec ulatio n of future hiring. The 
petitioner must establish eligibility at the time of filing the nonimmigrant visa petition. 8 C.F.R. § 
103.2(b)(l). A visa petition may not be approved at a future date after the petitioner or be neficiary becomes 
eligible under a new set of facts. Matter of Michelin Tire Corp., 17 I&N Dec. 248 (Reg. Comm 'r 1978). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECIS!Of\ 
Page 10 
There are additional inconsistencies and deficiencies with respect to the beneficiary's claimed duties 
within the scope of the petitioner's operations that further undermine the credibility of the 
petitioner's descriptions of the proffered position. For instance, the petitioner stated that the 
beneficiary will "[w]ork closely with Corporate Directors, Research & Development department, 
Finance Department." However, as previously noted, the petitioner only has one shareholder­
employee (its President), and thus does not appear to have "Corporate Directors" in the plural, nor a 
"Finance" department. 8 Furthermore, the petitioner characterized the proffered position's level of 
responsibility as "Mid-level," but submitted an LCA in support of the petition for a Level I (entry) 
position, corresponding to a comparatively low, entry-level position relative to others within the 
occupation.9 These discrepancies undermine the petitioner's descriptions of the proffered position, 
as well as the petitioner's overall credibility. The petitioner has not submitted any explanation, 
corroborated by independent objective evidence, to reconcile these discrepancies. Overall, all of the 
inconsistencies and deficiencies in the record, as described above, preclude us from comprehending 
the substantive nature of the proffered position. 
It is incumbent upon the petitioner to resolve any inconsistencies in the record by independent 
objective evidence. Any attempt to explain or reconcile such inconsistencies will not suffice unless 
the petitioner submits competent objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 
19 I&N Dec. at 591-92. Doubt cast on any aspect of the petitioner's proof may, of course, lead to a 
reevaluation of the reliability and sufficiency of the remaining evidence offered in support of the 
visa petition. !d. 
As discussed above, based on the inconsistencies and deficiencies of evidence, we cannot determine 
the substantive nature of the proffered position. The failure to establish the substantive nature of the 
8 The business plan specifically states that "HR and accounting functions will be outsourced initially." 
9 A Level I wage rate is described as follows: 
Level I (entry) wage rates are assigned to job offers for beginning l evel employees who have 
only a basic understanding of the occupation . These employees perform routine tasks that 
require limit ed, if any, exercise of judgment. The tasks provide experience and 
familiarization with the employer's methods, practices, and programs. The employees may 
perform higher level work for training and developmental purposes. These employees work 
under close supervision and receive specific instructions on required tasks and results 
expected . Their work is closel y monitored and reviewed for accuracy. Statements that the 
job offer is for a research fellow, a worker in training, or an internship are indicators that a 
Level I wage should be considered. 
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 DECIS!Ot>. 
Page 11 
work to be performed by the beneficiary consequently precludes a finding that the proffered position 
satisfies any criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A), because it is the substantive nature of that work 
that determines (1) the normal minimum educational requirement for the particular position, which is 
the focus of criterion 1; (2) industry positions which are parallel to the proffered position and thus 
appropriate for review for a common degree requirement, under the first alternate prong of criterion 2; 
(3) the level of complexity or uniqueness of the proffered position, which is the focus of the second 
alternate prong of criterion 2; (4) the factual justification for a petitioner normally requiring a degree or 
its equivalent, when that is an issue under criterion 3; and (5) the degree of specialization and 
complexity of the specific duties, which is the focus of criterion 4. 
Accordingly, as the petitioner has not established that it has satisfied any of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 
214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A), it cannot be found that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
The appeal will be dismissed and the petition denied for this reason. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The evidence of record fails to establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty 
occupation. 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; Matter 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.