dismissed H-1B Case: Retail

(b)(6)
DATE: 
INRE: 
JUN 0 2 2015 
Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION RECEIPT #: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service� 
Administrative Appeals Office 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
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: 
Enclosed is the non-precedent decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) for your case. 
If you believe we incorrectly decided your case, you may file a motion requesting us to reconsider our 
decision and/or reopen the proceeding. The requirements for motions are located at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. 
Motions must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) within 33 days of the date of this 
decision. The Form I-290B web page (www.uscis.gov/i-290b) contains the latest information on fee, filing 
location, and other requirements. Please do not mail any motions directly to the AAO. 
Thank you, 
Ron Rosenberg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the nonimmigrant visa petition. The 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. 
I. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND 
On the Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I-129), the petitioner describes itself as an 
eight-employee "Retail" firm established in In order to employ the beneficiary in what it 
designates as an "Operations Managerrr position, the petitioner seeks to classify him 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 found the initial evidence insufficient to establish eligibility for the benefit sought, and 
issued a Request for Evidence (RFE). Thereafter, the petitioner responded to the Directorrs RFE. 
The Director denied the petition, finding that the petitioner did not establish that it would employ 
the beneficiary in a specialty occupation position. On appeal, the petitioner asserts that the 
Directorrs basis for denial was erroneous and contends that the petitioner satisfied all evidentiary 
requirements. 
We base our decision upon our review of the entire record of proceeding, which includes: 
(1) the petitionerrs Form I-129 and the supporting documentation filed with it; (2) the service 
center's RFE; (3) the petitioner's response to the RFE; (4) the Director's denial letter; and (5) the 
Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) and the petitioner's submissions on appeal. We 
reviewed the record in its entirety before issuing our decision.1 
As will be discussed below, we have determined that the Director did not err in her decision to deny 
the petition on the specialty occupation issue. Accordingly, the Director's decision will not be 
disturbed. The appeal will be dismissed, and the petition will be denied. 
II. THE PROFFERED POSITION 
The Labor Condition Application (LCA) submitted to support the visa petitiOn states that the 
pr<?ffered position is an Operations Manager position, and that it corresponds to Standard 
Occupational Classification (SOC) code and title 11-1021, General and Operations Managers, from 
the Occupational Information Network (O*NET). The LCA further states that the proffered position 
is a wage Level I, entry-level, position. 
The petitioner also submitted a letter, dated June 14, 2013, from signing as the 
petitioner's president. Mr. stated that the petitioner has two locations and reiterated that it has 
eight employees. He provided the following description of the duties of the proffered position: 
1 We conduct appellate review on a de novo basis. See Soltane v. DOl, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3d Cir. 2004). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 3 
• Oversee activities directly related to providing customer service. 
• Direct and coordinate pricing, sales and distribution of products and services. 
• Review financial statements and sales to determine areas that need cost reduction. 
• Manage staff, prepare work schedules, and assign specific duties. 
• Direct and coordinate finances and budget in order to increase efficiency and 
maximize investments. 
• Establish and implement policies, goals, objectives and procedures. 
• Determine staffing requirements and interview, hire and train new employees. 
• Plan and direct activities such as sales promotions. 
• Determine goods and services to be sold and set prices based on customer demand. 
• Locate, select and procure merchandise for resale, representing management m 
purchase negotiations. 
As to the educational requirement of the proffered position, stated: "The person who 
will fill this position and will be responsible for said duties is required to have at least a Bachelor's 
degree in Business Administration, however, we would prefer a Master's degree." 
In response to the RFE, the petitioner provided the following description of the duties of the 
proffered position: 
Managing Daily Operations (50% . of time). This portion of the job duties includes 
providing the management with information regarding market analysis of competitors 
and a forecast of sales and market conditions. [The beneficiary] will also be 
responsible for training the staff to perform selling techniques and procedures for 
current promotions to achieve maximum revenue. He will oversee and direct the 
pricing, sales and distribution of retail products and services as well as coordinate 
promotions and sales to increase sale of product. He will determine the goods and 
services to be sold and set prices based on the demand of clientele. 
Revenue Management Policies (20% of time). As Operations Manager, [the 
beneficiary] will analyzes [sic] overall sales and seasonal fluctuations of the retail 
business. Additionally, he is responsible for formulating the company's policies, 
sales and discount policies and determining the market needs, volume potential, price 
and promotions. [The beneficiary] will be responsible for reviewing financial 
statements of the business to determine the need for cost adjustment to achieve the 
company's sales goals and maximize revenue. [The beneficiary] will maintain our 
company's Quickbooks Point of Sale System and perform a daily and monthly sales 
analysis. He will be responsible for providing sales data and payroll data of all 
employees to accountant. . 
Human Resources (10% of time). [The beneficiary] will resolve customer services 
issues and ensure the satisfaction of each customer. This involves training the staff to 
(b)(6)
Page 4 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
ensure service procedures are always followed in accordance with company 
standards. Additionally, he is responsible for determining which areas need 
improvement and training the staff to ensure improvement occurs to the satisfaction 
of the customers. 
Staffing (10% of time). [The beneficiary] will ensure that the employees are 
performing adequate! y to ensure revenue goals. This aspect of his position also 
involves identifying the need for new employees, interviewing, hiring and training 
new employees. He will be responsible for staff scheduling and assigning specific 
duties. 
Product Quality (10% of time). [The beneficiary] will be responsible for ensuring 
that the physical condition of retail locations are in accordance with established 
quality control standards. Preventative maintenance must be performed under his 
supervision to ensure quality and cleanliness at all times. He will purchase products 
based on future sales forecasts and needs of customers to decrease waste and increase 
sales. He will set prices and monitor distribution to our two locations. 
III. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION 
The issue is whether the petitioner has provided sufficient evidence to establish that, if the visa 
petition were approved, it would employ the beneficiary in a specialty occupation position. 
A. 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.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 entryinto the occupation in 
the United States. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 5 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty occupation, a proposed position 
must 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.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) mustlogically be read together 
with section 214(i)(1) of the Act and 8 C.F.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.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)( iii)(A) 
should logically be read as being necessary but not necessarily sufficient to meet the statutory and 
regulatory definition of specialty occupation. To otherwise interpret this section as stating the 
necessary .and sufficient conditions for meeting the definition of specialty occupation would result 
in particular positions meeting a condition under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) but not the statutory 
or regulatory definition. See Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). To avoid this 
result, 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) mu st 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)(1) 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-1B 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 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 6 
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-1B visa category. 
To determine whether a particular job qualifies as a specialty occupation, USCrS 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. 
B. Discussion 
As a preliminary matter, we note that in his June 14, 2013 letter, the petitioner's 
president asserted that the proffered position requires, "at least a Bachelor's Degree in Business 
Administration. " The petitioner has never asserted a more specific educational requirement for the 
proffered position. 
A degree with a generalized title, such as business administration, without further specification, is 
not a degree in a specific specialty. Cf Matter of Michael Hertz Associates, 19 r&N Dec. 558 
(Comm'r 1988). As such, an educational requirement that may be satisfied by an otherwise 
undifferentiated bachelor's degree in business administration is not a requirement of a minimum of a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. That the educational qualification of the 
proffered position may be satisfied by an otherwise unspecified bachelor's degree in business 
administration indicates that the proffered position is not a specialty occupation position. The 
Director's decision must therefore be affirmed and the petition denied on this basis alone. 
Nevertheless, we will continue our analysis of the specialty occupation issue . 
. 
The petitioner claims in the LCA that the proffered position corresponds to SOC code and title 
11-1021, General and Operations Managers, from O*NET. The evidence indicates that the 
petitioner owns two convenience stores with prepared food, such as sandwiches and pizza, and that 
the beneficiary would be involved in managing one or both of those locations. The duties attributed 
to the proffered position are generally consistent with the proffered position being a combination 
food service manager/first-line supervisor of retail sales workers position? The proffered position 
2 See the Handbook description of the duties of food service managers at U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of 
Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2014-15 ed., "Food Service Managers," 
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/management/food-service-managers.htm#tab-2 (last visited May 27, 2015) and the 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 7 
appears to be as likely a combination food service manager/first-line supervisor of retail sales 
workers position as it is a general and operations manager position. However, we will continue our 
analysis based on the assumption, made arguendo, that the proffered position is a general and 
operations manager position, so as to reach the petitioner's assertions pertinent to such positions.3 
To determine whether, based on that assumption, the proffered position would qualify as a specialty 
occupation position, we will first discuss the record of proceeding in relation to the criterion at 8 
C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)( l), which requires that a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific 
specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the particular 
position. We recognize the Handbook as an authoritative source on the duties and educational 
requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses.4 The Handbook discusses the 
duties of general and operations manager positions in its Top Executives chapter. 5 The Handbook 
states the following about the educational requirements of top executive positions: 
How to Become a Top Executive 
Although education and training requirements vary widely by position and industry, 
many top executives have at least a bachelor's degree and a considerable amount of 
work experience. 
Education 
O*NET description of the duties of first-line supervisors of retail sales workers at 
http://www .onetonline.org/link/summary /41-1011.00 (last visited May 27, 2015). 
3 The Handbook discusses food service managers in a dedicated chapter, in which it indicates that such 
positions typically require only a high school education. See U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 
Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2014-15 ed., "Food Service Managers," http://www.bls.gov/ooh/ 
management/food-service-managers.htm#tab-4 (last visited May 27, 2015). The Handbook does not contain 
such an in-depth discussion of first line supervisors of retail sales workers. However, O*Net indicates that 
those positions also typically require only a high school education. See 
http://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/41-1011.00. (last visited May 27, 2015). Neither O*NET nor the 
Handbook indicates that those positions require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its 
equivalent. If the proffered position were analyzed as a combination food service manager/first-line 
supervisor of retail sales workers position, that would not render it more likely to be found to qualify as a 
specialty occupation position. 
4 The Handbook, which is available in printed form, may also be accessed on the Internet, at 
http://www.bls.gov/oco/. Our references to the Handbook are to the 2014-2015 edition available online. 
5 U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2014-15 ed., "Top 
Executives," http://www.bls.gov/ooh/management/top-executives.htm#tab-2 (last visited May 27, 2015). 
(b)(6)
Page 8 
NON-PRECEDENT DECIS!OJ 
Many top executives have a bachelor's or master's degree in business administration 
or in an area related to their field of work. Top executives in the public sector often 
have a degree in business administration, public administration, law, or the liberal 
arts. Top executives of large corporations often have a master of business 
administration (MBA). College presidents and school superintendents typically have 
a doctoral degree in the field in which they originally taught or in education 
administration. 
Work Experience in a Related Occupation 
Many top executives advance within their own firm, moving up from lower level 
managerial or supervisory positions. However, other companies may prefer to hire 
qualified candidates from outside their organization. Top executives that are 
promoted from lower level positions may be able to substitute experience for 
education to move up in the company. For example, in industries such as retail trade 
or transportation, workers without a college degree may work their way up to higher 
levels within the company to become executives or general managers. 
Chief executives typically need extensive managerial experience. Executives are also 
expected to have experience in the organization's area of specialty. Most general and 
operations managers hired from outside an organization need lower level supervisory 
or management experience in a related field. 
Some general managers advance to higher level managerial or executive positions. 
Company training programs, executive development programs, and certification can 
often benefit managers or executives hoping to advance. Chief executive officers 
often become a member of the board of directors. 
Licenses, Certifications, and Registrations 
Top executives may complete a certification program through the Institute of 
Certified Professional Managers to earn the Certified Manager (CM) credential. To 
become a CM, candidates must meet education and experience requirements and pass 
three exams. 
Although not mandatory, certification can show management competency and 
potential leadership skills. Certification can also help those seeking advancement or 
can give jobseekers a competitive edge. 
· 
Important Qualities 
(b)(6)
Page 9 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Communication skills. Top executives must be able to communicate clearly and 
persuasively. They must effectively discuss issues and negotiate with others, direct 
subordinates, and explain their policies and decisions to those within and outside the 
organization. 
Decision-making skills. Top executives need decision-making skills when setting 
policies and managing an organization. They must assess different options and choose 
the best course of action, often daily. 
Leadership skills. Top executives must be able to lead an organization successfully 
by coordinating policies, people, and resources. 
Management skills. Top executives must organize and direct the operations of an 
organization. For example, they must manage business plans, employees, and 
budgets. 
Problem-solving skills. Top executives need problem-solving skills after identifying 
issues within an organization. They must be able to recognize shortcomings and 
effectively carry out solutions. 
Time-management skills. Top executives must be able to do many tasks at the same 
time, typically under their own direction, to ensure that their work gets done and that 
they meet their goals. 
U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2014-15 ed., 
"Top Executives," http://www.bls.gov/ooh/management/top-executives.htm#tab-4 (last visited May 
27, 2015). 
The Handbook does not indicate that a bachelor's degree or the equivalent, in a specific specialty, is 
normally required for entry into a top executive position. Instead, the Handbook finds that these 
positions generally impose no specific degree requirement on individuals seeking employment. The 
statement that "many" top executives, which category includes general and operations managers, have 
college degrees is not synonymous with the "normal[] minimum requirement" standard imposed by this 
criterion. To the contrary, such a statement does not even necessarily indicate that a majority of top 
executives possess such a degree. While the Handbook indicates that top management positions may 
be filled by individuals with a broad range of degrees, its subsequent discussion of the training and 
education necessary for such employment clearly states that companies also hire executives based on 
lower-level experience within their own organizations or management experience with another 
business. Moreover, the Handbook does not state that those positions which do require a bachelor's 
degree or the equivalent require that the degree be in a specific specialty. 
Accordingly, in certain instances, the Handbook is not determinative. When the Handbook does not 
support the proposition that a proffered position is one that meets the statutory and regulatory 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 10 
provlSlons of a specialty occupation, it is incumbent upon the petitioner to provide persuasive 
evidence that the proffered position more likely than not satisfies this or one of the other three 
criteria, notwithstanding the absence of the Handbook's support on the issue. In such case, it is the 
petitioner's responsibility to provide probative evidence (e.g., documentation from other objective, 
authoritative sources) that supports a finding that the particular position in question qualifies as a 
specialty occupation. Whenever more than one authoritative source exists, an adjudicator will 
consider and weigh all of the evidence presented to determine whether the particular position 
qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
The record of proceeding, however, does not contain sufficient persuasive documentary evidence 
from any other relevant authoritative source establishing that the proffered position's inclusion. 
within the top executive category would establish the proffered position as, in the words of this 
criterion, a "particular position" for which "[a] baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is 
normally the minimum requirement for entry." 
Further, we find that, to the extent that they are described in the record of proceeding, the numerous 
duties that the petitioner ascribes to the proffered position indicate a need for a range of knowledge 
of business operations, but do not establish any particular level of formal, postsecondary education 
leading to a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty as minimally necessary to attain such 
knowledge. 
As the evidence of record does not establish that the particular position here proffered is one for 
which the normal minimum entry requirement is a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific 
specialty, or its equivalent, the petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.P.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). 
Next, we find that the petitioner has not satisfied the first of the two alternative prongs of 8 C.F.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 for positions 
that are identifiable as being (1) in the petitioner's industry, (2) parallel to the proffered position, and 
also (3) located in organizations that are similar to the petitioner. 
In determining whether there is a common degree requirement, factors often considered by USCIS 
include: whether the Handbook reports that the industry requires a degree; whether the industry's 
professional association has made a degree a minimum entry requirement; and whether letters or 
affidavits from firms or individuals in the industry attest that such firms "routinely employ and 
recruit only degreed individuals." See Shanti, Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151, 1165 (D. Minn. 
1999) (quoting Hird/Blaker Corp. v. Sava, 712 F. Supp. 1095, 1102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). 
In the instant case, the petitioner has not established that the proffered position falls under an 
occupational category for which the Handbook, or other reliable and authoritative source, indicates 
that there is a standard, minimum entry requirement of at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 11 
Also, there are no submissions from professional associations, individuals, or similar firms 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. 
The petitioner did provide several vacancy announcements issued by other companies for operations 
manager positions; however, none of the announcements state that the hiring companies require a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. While one announcement states a requirement of a 
bachelor's degree in business, as we stated earlier, the requirement of a degree with a generalized 
title, such as business or business administration, without 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). 
Thus, 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 to positions parallel positions with organizations 
that are in the petitioner's industry and otherwise similar to the petitioner. The petitioner has not, 
therefore, satisfied the criterion of the first alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2). 
The evidence of record also does not satisfy the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2), which provides that "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." A review of the 
record indicates that the petitioner has not credibly demonstrated that the duties that comprise the 
proffered position entail such complexity or uniqueness as to constitute a position so complex or 
unique that it can be performed only by a person with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty. 
Specifically, the petitioner has not demonstrated how the duties that collectively constitute the 
proffered position require the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge such that a bachelor's or higher degree in a 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 a few related courses may be 
beneficial, or even required, in performing certain duties of the proffered position, the petitioner has 
not demonstrated 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 particular 
position here. 
Further, as was also noted above, the LCA submitted in support of the visa petition is approved for a 
wage Level I general and operations manager, an indication that the proffered position is an entry­
level position for an employee who has only a basic understanding of general and operations 
management. This does not support the proposition that the proffered position is so complex or 
unique that it can only be performed by a person with a specific bachelor's degree, especially as the 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 12 
Handbook suggests that some general and operations manager positions do not require such a 
degree. 
Therefore, the evidence of record does not establish that this position is significantly different from 
other positions in the occupation such that it refutes the Handbook's information to the effect that 
there is a spectrum of degrees acceptable for such positions, including degrees not in a specific 
specialty. In other words, the record lacks sufficiently detailed information to distinguish the 
proffered position as unique from or more complex than positions that can be performed by persons 
without at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. As the petitioner fails to 
demonstrate how the proffered position is so complex or unique relative to other positions within the 
same occupational category that do not require at least a baccalaureate degree in a specific specialty 
or its equivalent for entry into the occupation in the United States, it cannot be concluded that the 
petitioner has satisfied the second alternative prong of 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
We will next address the criterion at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2( h)(4)(iii)(A)(3), which may be satisfied if the 
petitioner demonstrates that it normally requires a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent for the proffered position. 
stated, in his June 14, 2013 letter, that the proffered position requires a minimum of a 
bachelor's degree in business administration. As was explained above, that is not a requirement of a 
minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent, and does not, therefore, 
indicate that the proffered position is a specialty occupation position. 
Further, however, indicated in his April 7, 2014 letter, that he and his business partner, 
had been performing the petitioner's overall management duties. He also stated that he 
is the petitioner's General Manager and . is the petitioner's Operations Manager. He 
stated that "lives in Illinois and it has become difficult for him to handle Operations 
Management from so far away in addition to his current job." He also stated while he himself does 
not have a bachelor's degree, has a bachelor's degree. A diploma in the record indicates 
that has a bachelor's degree in finance, rather than in business administration. 
The petitioner has not demonstrated that has been employed by the petitioner in the 
proffered position or that he performed the duties of the proffered position. In any event, previously 
hiring only one employee with a bachelor's degree does not establish a pattern that the petitioner 
normally requires, as opposed to simply prefers to hire, someone with at least a bachelor's degree in 
a specific specialty, or the equivalent, for the proffered position. Therefore, the petitioner has not 
satisfied the third criterion of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A). 
For all of the reasons explained above, the petitioner has not established that it normally requires a 
minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty to perform the duties of the proffered 
position, and has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISIOJ\i 
Page 13 
Finally, we will address the alternative criterion at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4), which is 
satisfied if the petitioner establishes that the nature of the specific duties is so specialized and 
complex that knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with the attainment of a 
baccalaureate or higher degree in a 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. The duties of the proffered position, such as overseeing 
customer service; directing and coordinating pricing, sales, and distribution of products and 
services; reviewing financial statements and sales to determine areas that need cost reduction; 
managing staff; preparing work schedules; assigning duties; directing and coordinating finances and 
budget; establishing and implementing policies, goals, objectives and procedures; determining 
staffing requirements; interviewing, hiring, and training new employees; planning and directing 
sales promotions; etc., contain insufficient indication of a nature so specialized and complex they 
require knowledge usually associated with attainment of a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty or its equivalent. 
Overall, the evidence of record is inadequate to establish that the duties of the positiOn are so 
specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform the duties is usually associated with 
the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 
In other words, even if the proffered position were assumed to be a general and operations manager 
position, the proposed duties have not been described with sufficient specificity to show that they 
are more specialized and complex than the duties of general and operations manager positions that 
are not usually associated with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. 
Further, as was noted above, the petitioner filed the instant visa petition for a wage Level I general 
and operations manager position, a position for a beginning-level employee with only a basic 
understanding of general and operations management. This does not support the proposition that the 
nature of the specific duties of the proffered position is so specialized and complex that their 
performance is usually associated with the attainment of a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty or its equivalent, directly related to general and operations management, especially 
as the Handbook indicates that some top executive positions, which category includes general and 
operations manager positions, require no such degree. 
For the reasons discussed above, the evidence of record does not satisfy the criterion at 8 C.P.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4) (iii)(A)(4). 
The evidence of record does not establish that the petitioner has satisfied any of the criteria at 8 
C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A) and, therefore, 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. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 14 
IV. CONCLUSION 
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.