dismissed H-1B Case: Software Development

(b)(6)
DATE: 
INRE: 
MAY 0 t 2015 
Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION RECEIPT#: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
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 IOI(a)(IS)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1 101 (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. § I 03.5. 
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 o ther requirements. Please do not mail any motions directly to the AAO. 
Thank you, 
Ron osen berg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENTDEC§JON 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California Service Center, denied the nonimmigrant visa petition. The 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
dismissed. 
On the Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (Form 1-129), the petitioner describes itself as an IT 
consulting and software development company established in In order to employ the 
beneficiary in what it designates as a "Software Engineer/Java Developer" position, the petitioner 
seeks to classify her as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to section 
101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101 ( a)(15)(H)(i)(b ). 
On June 10, 2014, the director denied the petition finding that the petitioner did not establish that the 
proffered position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation in accordance with the 
applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. On appeal, the petitioner asserts that the director's 
basis for denial of the petition was erroneous and contends that it satisfied all evidentiary 
requirements. 
A review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) records indicates that another 
employer filed a Form 1-129 seeking nonimmigrant H-lB classification on behalf of the beneficiary. 
USCIS records further indicate that this other employer's petition was approved on September 19, 
2014. Because the beneficiary in the instant petition has been approved for H-lB employment with 
another employer, further pursuit of the matter at hand is moot. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.