dismissed H-1B Case: Sports Coaching

MATTER OF T-U-0-T-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: DEC. 28,2016 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a university, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as an assistant tennis coach 
and recruiting coordinator under the H-1 B nonimmigrant classification for specialty 
occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b). The H-lB program allows a U.S. employer to temporarily employ a 
qualified foreign worker in a position that requires both (a) the theoretical and practical application 
of a body of highly specialized knowledge and (b) the attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in 
the specific specialty (or its equivalent) as a minimum prerequisite for entry into the position. 
The Director, California Service Center, denied the petition. The Director concluded the Petitioner 
did not establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and 
asserts that the Director erred in denying the petition. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
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: 
(b)(6)
Matter ofT-U-0-T-
(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. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has consistently 
interpreted 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 proposed 
position. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Cherto,[f, 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"); Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). 
II. PROFFERED POSITION 
I 
In the H -1 B petition, the Petitioner sttated that the Beneficiary will serve as an "assistant coach and 
recruiting coordinator." In its apPeal, the Petitioner provides the following job duties for the 
position, similar to those submitted in response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE) 1: 
• Assist the Head Coach and tennis staff in recruiting highly skilled student-athletes 
for the tennis team; recruitment will include a heavy focus on international 
prospective student-athletes (PSAs). (10% of time) .. . Required to understand 
how the with basic statistics knowledge in order to 
identify recruits that are performing at a satisfactory level in order to predict a 
player's potential for success at the level ... Must have specialized 
knowledge of international tennis landscape including the operation of the 
and national systems such as the 
• Develop and implement programs to assist student-athletes in their transition into 
the college environment (20% of tinie) ... Requires a strong background and 
knowledge base in exercise science and elite playing experience ... Designing a 
training program for an tennis team involves specific 
1 Portions of the provided duty description were not included for the sake of brevity. 
2 
(b)(6)
Matter ofT- U-0- T-
knowledge such as understanding the interplay between sport specific skills 
(technique and biomechanics of strokes), aerobic capacity, anaerobic capacity, 
strength, agility and speed. These concepts are taught in college courses on 
Human Anatomy and Physiology, Kinesiology, Exercise Physiology, 
Biomechanics, Motor Control and Strength and Conditioning Program 
Design .. . A [Petitioner] training program is far more complex than programs 
general implemented by coaches because the training program at [the Petitioner] 
must be all encompassing (racket skills, fitness, strength and conditioning aspects) 
and strategically periodized in order for student athletes to reach peak 
performance at conference tournaments and national events ... (20% of time) 
• Assist in the coordination and management of on-campus matches. (10% of 
time) ... The job requires understanding and application of undergraduate level 
statistics in order to interpret match results and formulate the educated lineup 
decisions to give teams the best chance of winning. 
• Assist in the development , of student-athletes: (20% of time) ... The Assistant 
Coach accomplishes this through the design and implementation of tennis specific 
progra11,1s and encouraging student athletes to participate in community service 
opportunities as well as teaching athletes through excerpts from motivational 
books, famous athlete biographies and sports psychology books ... Coursework 
from classes dealing with Philosophy and Character Development is necessary for 
the development of the studc:~nt athlete in terms of their character and civic 
responsibilities in society. 
• Assist in the daily preparation and coordination of team practices. (20% of 
time) ... The job requires a.strong background and knowledge base in the field of 
exercise science due to the competitiveness of tennis, and complex 
nature of movements required of an elite tennis player and the understanding and 
conducting of sport specific physical testing ... Program design give[s] [the 
Beneficiary] a specialized knowledge base that is extremely rare, and allows him 
to design highly synthesized and specialized practice plans. 
• Assist in the development of the strength and conditioning program for student 
athletes. ( 4% of time) ... The Assistant Coach must have understanding of 
different types of metabolic systems (anaerobic, aerobic and phosphagen system) 
and how they apply to designing an elite tennis player's training program . 
• Responsible for coordinating all team travel for the tennis team. (4% of time) 
• Responsible for assisting the head coach with the overall management of the 
tennis operations, travel, recruiting, equipment, coaching and managing the team 
operating budget of$152,000. (4% of time) 
• Assist in marketing and promotion of tennis program. ( 4% of time). 
• Assist in fundraising for tennis program. ( 4% of time) 
• Perform necessary administ rative duties. (seasonal depending on when 
tournaments are held) 
3 
Matter ~fT-U-0-T-
According to the Petitioner, the minimum education required for the position of assistant tennis 
coach is a bachelor's degree along with one year of collegiate coaching experience. 
III. ANALYSIS 
Upon review of the record in its totality and for the reasons set out below, we determine that the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated that the proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation? 
Specifically, the record does not establish that the job duties require an educational background, or 
its equivalent, commensurate with a specialty occupation. 3 
As a preliminary matter, the Petitioner's claim that a bachelor's degree is a sufficient minimum 
requirement for entry into the proffered position is inadequate to establish that the proposed 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. There must be a close correlation between the required specialized studies and the 
position; thus, the mere requirement of a degree, without further specification, does not establish the 
position as a specialty occupation. C.f Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. 558, 560 
(Comm'r 1988) ("The mere requirement of a college degree for the sake of general education, or to 
obtain what an employer perceives to be a higher caliber employee, also does not establish 
eligibility."). Thus, while a general-purpose bachelor's degree 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. Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 
F.3d at 147. 
The Petitioner asserts that its minimum requirement for the proffered position is only a bachelor's 
degree, without further requiring that that degree be in any specific specialty. 4 Without more, the 
Petitioner's statement alone indicates that the proffered position is not in fact a specialty 
2 Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap, we will address each of the criteria individually. 
3 
The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H-1 B 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. 
4 In its support letter and in response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner stated that the proffered position required a 
minimum of a bachelor's degree and prior coaching experience. In addition, the Petitioner submitted a posting for the 
proffered position indicating that it only requires a "bachelor's degree and one year of collegiate coaching experience" 
and makes no mention of the referenced coursework. The Petitioner added on appeal that it requires a minimum of a 
bachelor's degree and the "preferred fields of study for the position are exercise science, sports science, or education." 
On appeal, the Petitioner cannot offer a new position to the Beneficiary, or materially change a position's title, its level 
of authority within the organizational hierarchy, the associated job responsibilities, or the requirements of the position. 
The Petitioner must establish that the position offered to the Beneficiary when the petition was filed merits classification 
for the benefit sought. See Matter of Michelin Tire Corp., 17 I&N Dec. 248, 249 (Reg'l Comm'r 1978). A petitioner 
may not make material changes to a petition in an effort to make a deficient petition conform to USCIS requirements. 
See Matter of lzummi, 22 I&N Dec. 169, 176 (Assoc. Comm 'r 1998). Furthermore, a preference for a candidate with a 
bachelor's degree in a certain specialty is not a requirement that the individual have such a degree to qualify for the 
position. 
4 
Matter ofT-U-0-T-
occupation. The Director's decision must therefore be affirmed and the appeal dismissed on this 
basis alone. 
A. First Criterion 
We tum first 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. To inform this inquiry, we recognize the U.S. Department of Labor's 
(DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) as an authoritative source on the duties and 
educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses.5 
On the labor condition application (LCA) submitted in support of the H-1 B petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the occupational category "Coaches and Scouts" 
corresponding to the Standard Occupational Classification code 27-2022.6 
We reviewed the section of the Handbook regarding the occupational category "Coaches and 
Scouts," including the section entitled "How to Become a Coach or Scout," which describes the 
following preparation for the occupation: 
Coaches and scouts typically need a bachelor's degree. They must also have 
extensive knowledge of the sport. Coaches typically gain this knowledge through 
their own experiences playing the sport at some level. Although previous playing 
experience may be beneficial, it is not required for most scouting jobs. 
Education 
College and professional coaches must usually have a bachelor's degree. This degree 
can typically be in any subject. However, some coaches may decide to study exercise 
5 All of our references are to the 2016-Q017 edition of the Handbook. which may be accessed at the Internet site 
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/. We do not, however, maintain that the Handbook is the exclusive source of relevant 
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 USCIS regularly reviews 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 of proof remains on the Petitioner to submit sufficient evidence to support a finding that its particular position 
would normally have a minifnum, specialty degree requirement, or its ~quivalent. for entry. 
6 The Petitioner classified the proffered position at a Level II wage. We will consider this selection in our analysis of the 
position. The "Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance" issued by the DOL provides a description of the wage 
levels. A Level II wage rate is generally appropriate for positions for which the Petitioner expects the Beneficiary to 
have attained, either through education or experience, a good understanding of the occupation, but who will only perform 
moderately complex tasks that require limited judgment. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing 
Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http://flcdatacenter.com/download/NPWHC_Guidance_Revised_ll_2009.pdf A prevailing wage determination starts 
with an entry level wage and progresses to a higher wage level after considering the experience, education, and skill 
requirements of the Petitioner's job opportunity. !d. 
5 
Matter ofT-U-0-T-
and sports science, physiology, kinesiology, nutrition and fitness, physical education, 
and sports medicine. 
Scouts must also typically have a bachelor's degree. Some scouts decide to get a 
degree in business, marketing, sales, or sports management. 
[Emphasis added.] 
U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2016-17 ed., 
"Coaches and Scouts," http://www.bls.gov/oohfentertainment-and-sports/coaches-and­
scouts.htm#tab-4 (last visited Dec. 1, 20 16). 
The Handbook reports that although college and professional coaches must usually have a bachelor's 
degree, the degree can typically be in any subject. Therefore, although some coaches may decide to 
study a sports-related field such as physiology, kinesiology, or sports medicine, the Handbook does 
not indicate that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is a minimum 
requirement. USCIS interprets the degree requirement at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to require a 
degree in a specific specialty (or its equivalent) that is directly related to the proposed position. 
Since there must be a close correlation bet\veen the required specialized studies and.the position, the 
requirement of a general bachelor's degree, without further specification, does not establish the 
position as a specialty occupation. C.'f Jovfatter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. 558 (Comm 'r 
1988). ' 
Thus, the Handbook does not support the claim that the occupational category "Coaches and Scouts" 
is one for which normally the minimum requirement for entry is a baccalaureate degree (or higher) 
in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. Even if it did (which it does not), to satisfy the first 
criterion, the Petitioner must provide evidence to support a finding that the particular position 
proffered would normally have such a minimum, specialty degree requirement or its equivalent. 
Here, the Petitioner provides no other documentary evidence from independent or authoritative 
sources reporting that a minimum industry-wide requirement for entry is a baccalaureate degree (or 
higher) in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. Again, the Petitioner directly states that the position 
only requires a bachelor's degree and one year of coaching experience, but does not articulate that a 
degree in specific specialty is required for the position. 
Therefore, the Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l). 
B. 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 
6 
Matter ofT-U-0-T-
casts its gaze upon the common industry practice, while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the 
Petitioner's specific position. 
1. 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. 
In determining whether there is such 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 de greed individuals." See Shanti, Inc. v. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151, 1165 (D. Minn. 
1999)(quotingHird/BlakerCorp. v. Sava, 712F. Supp.1095, 1102(S.D.N.Y. 1989)). 
Here and as already discussed, the Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one for 
which the Handbook (or other independent, authoritative source) 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. In addition, there are no submissions from the 
industry's professional association indicating that it has made a degree a minimum entry requirement. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner did not submit any letters or affidavits from similar firms or individuals in 
the Petitioner's industry attesting that such firms "routinely employ and recruit only degreed 
individuals." 
In response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner submitted two job announcements for assistant tennis 
coaches at major universities in the United States. However, each of these postings reflected that the 
positions required only a bachelor's degree, not a bachelor's degree in any specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. 
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 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 ofthe first alternative prong of8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
2. Second Prong 
We will next consider the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2), which 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. 
7 
Matter ofT- U-0- T-
In its appeal, the Petitioner contends that the proffered assistant tennis coach position is complex and 
unique such that its duties can only be performed by a degreed individual. The Petitioner contends 
that the position requires scientific knowledge of exercise, sports, education, and marketing. 
Further, the Petitioner asserts that the Director erred by requiring that it demonstrate that the 
Beneficiary's position is more complex or unique than other similar assistant coach positions, noting 
that this is not a requirement of the regulations. 
The Petitioner, however, has not credibly demonstrated relative complexity or uniqueness as aspects of 
the proffered position. Specifically, it is unclear hov.· the proffered position, as described, necessitates 
the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge such that a person 
who has attained a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent is required to 
perform them. Rather, we find that, as reflected in this decision's earlier quotation of duty 
descriptions from the record of proceeding, the evidence of record does not distinguish the proffered . 
position from other positions falling within the "Coaches and Scouts" occupational category, which, 
the Handbook indicates, do not necessarily require a person with at least a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty or its equivalent to enter those positions. 
The Petitioner identifies specific coursework completed by the Beneficiary, suggesting that this 
demonstrates the complex and unique nature of the position, including his completion of courses in 
human anatomy, physiology, kinesiology, exercise physiology, biometrics, motor control and 
strength and conditioning program design, statistics, and philosophy. While these courses may be 
beneficial, or even essential, in performing certain duties of the assistant tennis coach position, the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated how an established curriculwn 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 proffered position. Further, it is noteworthy that the Petitioner does not specifically 
assert that these classes are required for the position, but only a general bachelor's degree. 
This is further evidenced by the LCA submitted by the Petitioner in support of the instant petition. 
Again, the LCA indicates that, relative to other positions located within the "Coaches and Scouts" 
occupational category, the Beneficiary would perform only moderately complex tasks requiring only 
limited judgment. Without further evidence, the evidence does not demonstrate that the proffered 
position is complex or unique as such a position falling under this occupational category would 
likely be classified at a higher-level, such as a Level III (experienced) or Level IV (t'ully competent) 
position, requiring a significantly higher prevailing wage. 7 For example, a Level IV (fully 
7 
The issue here is that the Petitioner's designation of this position as a Level II position undermines its claim that the 
position is particularly complex, specialized, or unique compared to other positions >vitMn the same 
occupation. Nevertheless, it is important to note that a Level II wage-designation does not preclude a proffered position 
from classification as a specialty occupation. In certain occupations (doctors or lawyers, for example), such a position 
would still require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, tor entry. Similarly, 
however, a Level IV wage-designation would not reflect that an occupation qualifies as a specialty occupation if that 
higher-level position does not have an entry requirement of at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its 
equivalent. That is, a position's wage level designation may be a consideration but is not a substitute for a determination 
of whether a proffered position meets the requirements of section 214( i)( I) of the Act. 
8 
Matter ofT-U-0-T-
competent) position is designated by DOL for employees who "use advanced skills and diversified 
knowledge to solve unusual and complex problems." The evidence of record does not establish that 
this position is significantly different from other positions in the occupational category such that it 
refutes the Handbook's information that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, 
is not required for the proffered position. 
The Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary is well-qualified for the position and his knowledge is 
extremely rare." 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. 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). 
C. 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. 
The Petitioner has not expressly asserted eligibility, or submitted evidence under this criterion to 
establish that it has ever previously employed an assistant tennis coach or, if it has, what that 
person's qualificatiqns were. While a first-time hiring for a position is certainly not a basis for 
precluding a position from recognition as a specialty occupation, it is unclear how an employer that 
has never recruited and hired for the position would be able to satisfy the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3), which requires a demonstration that it normally requires at least a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent for the position. Furthermore, as we noted, 
the Petitioner provided a job announcement for the Beneficiary's position reflecting that only a 
"bachelor's degree and one year of collegiate coaching experience'' was sufficient for the position. 
As such, this evidence does not reflect that the position normally requires a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty or its equivalent. Therefore, we cannot conclude that the Petitioner has satisfied 
the third criterion of8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 8 
8 While a petitioner may believe or otherwise assert that a proffered position requires a degree in a specific specialty, 
that opinion alone without corroborating evidence cannot establish the position as a specialty occupation. Were USCIS 
limited solely to reviewing a petitioner's claimed self-imposed requirements, then any individual with a bachelor's 
degree could be brought to the United States to perform any occupation as long as the employer artificially created a 
token degree requirement, whereby all individuals employed in a particular position possessed a baccalaureate or higher 
degree in the specific specialty, or its equivalent. See Defensor v. Meissner, 20 I F. 3d at 387. In other words, if a 
petitioner's degree requirement is only symbolic and the proffered position does not in fact require such a specialty 
degree, or its equivalent, to perform its duties, the occupation would not meet the statutory or regulatory definition of a 
specialty occupation. See section 2l4(i)(l) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) (defining the term "specialty 
occupation"). 
9 
Matter ofT-U-0-T-
D. 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. 
In its appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the position is specialized and complex, noting that college 
coaches are required to have a level of education allowing them to communicate professionally, 
recruit talented athletes, set budgets, advise students on academics, and assist foreign students in 
adjusting to student life in the United States. 
However, for similar reasons we discussed under the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2), we find that the record does not sufficiently develop relative specialization 
or complexity as an aspect of the proffered position. We refer to our earlier comments and findings 
with regard to the implication of the Petitioner's designation of the proffered position in the LCA as a 
Level II wage, and hence one not likely distinguishable by relatively specialized and complex duties. 
We have also reviewed the Petitioner's description of duties for the proffered position, including the 
Petitioner's expanded descriptions submitted in response to the Director's RFE and on appeal. While 
we understand that the Beneficiary may have certain sports science and educational knowledge which 
would assist him in performing the duties of the position, the Petitioner has not sufficiently explained 
how these duties require the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge, and the attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its 
equivalent) as a minimum for entry into the occupation in tlle United States. 
On appeal, the Petitioner makes reference to three of our non-precedent decisions where we concluded 
that university level assistant tennis coaches qualified under the fourth criterion at 8 C.F .R. § 
214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). However, we note that, when "any person makes application for a visa or any 
other document required for entry, ·or makes application for admission, ... the burden of proof shall 
be upon such person to establish that he is eligible" for such benefit. Section 291 of the Act, 8 
U.S.C. § 1361; see also Matter a/Treasure Craft ofCal., 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg'! Comm'r 1972). 
Furthermore, any suggestion that USCIS must review unpublished decisions and possibly request 
and review each case file relevant to those decisions, while being impractical and inefficient, would 
also be a shift in the evidentiary burden in these proceedings from the Petitioner to USCIS, which 
would be contrary to section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Lastly, while 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(c) 
provides that our precedent decisions are binding on all USCIS employees in the administration of 
the Act, unpublished decisions are not similarly binding. 
Upon review ofthe totality of the record, the record does not include probative evidence that the duties 
require more than a general bachelor's degree and experience in coaching tetmis. The Petitioner has not 
demonstrated in the record 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). 
10 
Matter ofT-U-0-T-
IV. CONCLUSION 
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. 
The burden is on the Petitioner to show eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter o.fOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 (BJA 2013). Here, that burden 
has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter o.fT-U-0-T-, ID# 146559 (AAO Dec. 28, 2016) 
II