dismissed H-1B Case: Retail
Decision Summary
The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary possessed the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree, as the submitted credential evaluation improperly combined education and work experience. Beyond the initial denial, the AAO also found that the petitioner failed to prove that the store manager position itself qualifies as a specialty occupation, noting that a bachelor's degree is not a standard minimum requirement for entry into such a role.
Criteria Discussed
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 Washington, DC 20529 U. S. Citizenship and Immigration FILE: SRC 04 245 50443 Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: 1 2 2006 PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 3 1 10 l(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: INSTRUCTIONS : This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. Robert P. Wiemann, Director Administrative Appeals Office SRC 04 245 50443 Page 2 DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the nonimmigrant visa petition and the matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. The petition will be denied. The petitioner is involved in the import and sale of clothing, and seeks to employ the beneficiary as a store manager. It endeavors to classify him as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to section 10 1 (a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 4 1 10 1 (a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b). The director denied the petition because the beneficiary did not qualify to perform the duties of a specialty occupation. On appeal, counsel submits a brief and additional information stating that the beneficiary qualifies to perform the duties of the offered position. The director's determination denying the Form 1-129 petition was based solely on the beneficiary's qualifications to perform the duties associated with that occupation. The first issue to be discussed in this proceeding is whether the beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of a specialty occupation. Section lOl(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 9 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b), provides, in part, for the classification of qualified nonimmigrant aliens who are coming temporarily to the United States to perform services in a specialty occupation. Section 214(i)(2) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1184(i)(2), states that an alien applying for classification as an H-1B nonimmigrant worker must possess: (A) full state licensure to practice in the occupation, if such licensure is required to practice in the occupation, (B) completion of the degree described in paragraph (l)(B) for the occupation, or (C) (i) experience in the specialty equivalent to the completion of such degree, and (ii) recognition of expertise in the specialty through progressively responsible positions relating to the specialty. Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 9 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C), to qualify to perform services in a specialty occupation, the alien must meet one of the following criteria: (I) Hold a United States baccalaureate or higher degree required by the specialty occupation from an accredited college or university; (2) Hold a foreign degree determined to be equivalent to a United States baccalaureate or higher degree required by the specialty occupation from an accredited college or university; (3) Hold an unrestricted State license, registration or certification which authorizes him or her to filly practice the specialty occupation and be immediately engaged in that specialty in the state of intended employment; or SRC 04 245 50443 Page 3 (4) Have education, specialized training, andfor progressively responsible experience that is equivalent to completion of a United States baccalaureate or higher degree in the specialty occupation, and have recognition of expertise in the specialty through progressively responsible positions directly related to the specialty. Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 8 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D), for purposes of paragraph (h)(4)(iii)(C)(4) of this section, equivalence to completion of a United States baccalaureate or higher degree shall mean achievement of a level of knowledge, competence, and practice in the specialty occupation that has been determined to be equal to that of an individual who has a baccalaureate or higher degree in the specialty and shall be determined by one or more of the following: (I) An evaluation from an official who has authority to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience in the specialty at an accredited college or university which has a program for granting such credit based on an individual's training and/or work experience; (2) The results of recognized college-level equivalency examinations or special credit programs, such as the College Level Examination Program (CLEP), or Program on Noncollegiate Sponsored Instruction (PONSI); (3) An evaluation of education by a reliable credentials evaluation service which specializes in evaluating foreign educational credentials; (4) Evidence of certification or registration from a nationally-recognized professional association or society for the specialty that is known to grant certification or registration to persons in the occupational specialty who have achieved a certain level of competence in the specialty; (5) A determination by the Service that the equivalent of the degree required by the specialty occupation has been acquired through a combination of education, specialized training, and/or work experience in areas related to the specialty and that the alien has achieved recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation as a result of such training and experience. The director determined that the position offered is that of a store manager, and as such, the beneficiary is not qualified to perform the duties of the position as the record does not establish that his foreign education is equivalent to a degree in business or business management from an accredited college or university in the United States. The petitioner submitted an experiential evaluation from the International Center for Credential Evaluation (ICCE), a credentials evaluation service. That evaluation determined that the beneficiary's education is equivalent to 3.9 years of undergraduate study toward a bachelor's degree with a major in management, education falling short of a bachelor's degree. The evaluation service then determined that the beneficiary's education and work experience is equivalent to a bachelor's degree with a major in management. Credentials evaluation services may only evaluate foreign education for equivalency purposes, not work experience. 8 C.F.R. fj 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(3). An individual's work experience may only be evaluated for degree equivalency purposes by an evaluator who has authority to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience in the specialty at a college or university which has a program for granting such credit based on an individual's training and/or work experience. 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(I). The record SRC 04 245 50443 Page 4 does not establish that the evaluators at ICCE in this instance have such authority. As such, the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary has the requisite education or equivalent experience to perform the duties of a specialty occupation. Beyond the decision of the director, the petitioner has failed to establish that a baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the offered position, or that a degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. Factors often considered by CIS when determining these criteria include: whether the Department of Labor's Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) reports that the industry requires a degree; whether an industry 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, Znc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1 15 1, 1 165 (D. Minn. 1999) (quoting Hird/Blaker Corp. v. Suva, 7 12 F. Supp. 1095, 1 102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). The AAO routinely consults the Handbook for information about the duties and educational requirements of particular occupations. The duties of the proffered position in this instance are those of a retail clothing store manager, or generalloperations managers as discussed in the Handbook. The Handbook notes that the formal education and experience of these managers varies as widely as the nature of their responsibilities. Many have a bachelor's or higher degree in business administration or liberal arts, while others obtain their positions by promotion from lower level management positions. Thus, it is possible to obtain a position as a general or operations manager without a college degree by promotion from within the organization based upon performance alone. It is apparent from the Handbook that a baccalaureate or higher degree, in a specific specialty, is not the minimum requirement for entry into the offered position. Positions requiring a college degree are filled from a wide range of educational disciplines. A degree in a specific specialty, however, is not required. The petitioner makes reference to the SVP rating applied to the position by the Dictionary of Occupational Titles to establish that the position of store manager requires a minimum of a bachelor's degree. An SVP rating is meant to indicate only the total number of years of vocational preparation required for a particular position. The SVP classification does not describe how those years are to be divided among training, formal education, and experience, nor does it specify the particular type of degree, if any, that a position would require. Further, the record does not establish any of the remaining criteria of.8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). For this additional reason, the petition may not be approved and the AAO shall not disturb the director's denial of the petition. The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. ยง 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden and the appeal shall accordingly be dismissed. ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.
Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial
MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.
Avoid This in My Petition →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.