dismissed H-1B Case: Telecommunications

(b)(6)
DATE: 
IN RE: 
MAY 2 8 Z015 
Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
PETITION RECEIPT #: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Serviceo 
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 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, California 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 a 
45-employee "Telecommunication" firm established in In order to employ the beneficiary in 
what it designates as "Financial Analyst" 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. § 11 01 (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 RFE. The Director 
reviewed the information and determined that the petitioner did not establish eligibility for the 
benefit sought. The Director denied the petition, finding that the evidence did not establish that the 
beneficiary is qualified to "perform the services of the specialty occupation." On appeal, the 
petitioner asserted that the Director's basis for denial was erroneous and contended that the petitioner 
satisfied all evidentiary requirements. 
We base our decision upon our review of the entire record of proceeding, which includes: 
(1 ) the petitioner's Form 1-12 9 and the supporting documentation; (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 beneficiary qualifications issue. Accordingly, the Director's decision will not be 
disturbed. Beyond the decision of the Director, we also find that the evidence does not establish that 
the proffered position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. 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 
proffered position is a Financial Analyst position, and that it corresponds to Standard Occupational 
Classification (SOC) code and title 13-205 1, Financial Analysts, from the Occupational Information 
Network (O*N ET). The LCA further states that the proffered position is a wage Level I, entry-level, 
position. 
1 We conduct appellate review on a de novo basis. See Soltane v. DOJ, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3d Cir. 2004). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 3 
The petitioner submitted a letter, dated April 15, 2014, from signing as the 
petitioner's president. That letter contains the following description of the duties of the proffered 
position: 
DESCRIPTION TIME% 
Analyzing procedures to devise most efficient methods of accomplishing 
company goals; Studying financial planning, organizational change & cost 35% 
analysis of the organization; Consulting with management to determine its 
assets, liabilities, cash flow, insurance coverage, tax status, and financial 
objectives 
Gathering and organizing information on problems or procedures including 
present operating procedures; Analyzing data gathered, developing 25% 
information and proposing available solutions or alternate methods of 
proceedings to management. 
Organizing and documenting findings of studies and recommend to the 
management on implementation of new systems, procedural changes, and 
company goals; Analyzing financial status of the company and developing 25% 
financial plans based on analysis of data, and discussing financial options with 
the manag_ement. 
Interacting with other managers and executives to assure smooth functioning 10% 
of newly implemented systems and procedures. 
35% -- Analyzing procedures to devise most efficient methods of accomplishing 
company goals; Studying financial planning, organizational change & cost 
analysis of the organization; Consulting with management to determine its assets, 
liabilities, cash flow, insurance coverage, tax status, and financial objectives 
Create financial plans and forecasts for the company. Create and manage P&L, 
balance sheet, and cash flow models with regular updates with different scenarios and 
assumptions. Manage store payroll plans. Work with field management to ensure 
compliance with prescribed targets. Comply with due diligence requests related to 
lenders and other financial stakeholders. Create detailed annual financial plan for 
retail stores. Create and manage store-level sales plans and incentive requirements. 
Establish and implement policies, goals, objec tives, and procedures for the financial 
operations. 
25% -- Gathering and orgamzzng information on problems or procedures 
including present operating procedures; Analyzing data gathered, developing 
information and proposing available solutions or alternate methods of proceedings 
to management. 
Gather information, assemble spreadsheets, write reports, and review all non-legal 
pertinent information about prospective deals. They examine the feasibility of a deal 
(b)(6)
Page 4 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
and prepare a plan of action based on financial analysis. Analyze financial results 
and identify areas for improvement. Work with information technology group to 
improve system-reporting abilities, and help ensure the capabilities of the company 
new retail system are maximized. Manage one direct report. 
25% -- Organizing and documenting findings of studies and recommend to the 
management on implementation of new systems, procedural changes, and company 
goals; Analyzing financial status of the company and developing financial plans 
based on analysis of data, and discussing financial options with the management. 
Prepare plans of action for investment based on financial analyses and Company's 
needs. Implement strategy and tactics. Planning, organizing, directing, controlling 
and evaluating the operations of financial operations. Development and 
Implementation of financial policies and systems. Establishment of performance 
standards. Preparation of various financial reports for senior managers. Come up 
with investment strategies to meet their financial goals. Provide financial forecasts 
and prepare budgets. Make recommendations on investments and investment timing. 
10%2 -- Interacting with other managers and executives to assure smooth 
functioning of newly implemented systems and procedures. 
Analyze financials/statistics for benchmarking performance; create and update reports 
useful to management. Meet with company officials to gain a better insight into the 
company's prospects and to determine it managerial effectiveness. 
also stated: 
It is apparent that a Financial Analyst with the specific duties listed above, would be 
considered a professional position and would normally be filled by a graduate with a 
minimum of a Bachelor's Degree in Business Administration or a related area, or the 
equivalent. 
Subsequently, Mr. stated that the proffered position requires, "a Bachelor's degree m 
Business Administration, Finance, or a related field." 
2 We observe that the sum of the percentages of time attributed to the various duties of the proffered position 
does not equal lOO%. 
(b)(6)
Page 5 
III. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
USCIS is required to follow long-standing legal standards and determine first, whether the proffered 
position qualifies as a specialty occupation, and second, whether an alien beneficiary was qualified 
for the position at the time the nonimmigrant visa petition was filed. Cf Matter of Michael Hertz 
Assoc., 19 I&N Dec. 558, 560 (Comm'r 19 88) (''The facts of a beneficiary's background only come 
at issue after it is found that the position in which the petitioner intends to employ him falls within [a 
specialty occupation] ."). Theref ore, we will first address the issue of whether the petitioner has 
provided sufficient evidence to establish that it will employ the beneficiary in a specialty occupation 
position. 
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 
know ledge, 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) 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. § 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 
(b)(6)
Page 6 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
(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) must logically 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 (1 988) (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 (198 9); Matter ofW­
F-, 21 I&N Dec. 503 (BIA 19 96). 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.P.R. § 214 .2(h)(4)(iii)(A) but not the statutory or 
regulatory definition. See Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F.3d 38 4, 38 7 (5th Cir. 2000). To avoid this 
result, 8 C.F.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 21 4(i)( 1) 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)(i ii)(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 , 14 7 (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 
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, USCIS 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. USCIS 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)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 7 
B. Analysis 
As a preliminary matter, the petitioner's claim that a bachelor's degree in business administration 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 requirement of a degree with a generalized title such as 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 19 88). 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 
explained above, USCIS interprets the degree requirement at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2( h)(4)(iii)(A) to 
require a degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proposed position. users has 
consistently stated that, 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. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d 139, 147 (1st Cir. 2007). 
The petitioner asserts that a bachelor's degree in business administration, without further requiring 
that that degree be in any specific specialty, is sufficient for entry into the proffered position. 
Without more, the petitioner's statement alone indicates that the proffered position is not, in fact, a 
specialty occupation. The Director's decision must therefore be affirmed and the appeal dismissed on 
this basis alone. 
Nevertheless, for the purpose of performing a comprehensive analysis of whether the proffered 
position qualifies as a specialty occupation, we will discuss the record of proceeding in relation to the 
four criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
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 U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook), cited by 
the petitioner, as an authoritative source on the duties and educational requirements of the wide 
variety of occupations·that it addresses.3 The petitioner claims in the LCA that the proffered position 
corresponds to SOC code and title 13 -2051, Financial Analysts, from O*NET. We reviewed the 
chapter of the Handbook entitled "Financial Analysts," including the sections regarding the typical 
3 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. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 8 
duties and requirements for this occupational category. The Handbook states the following with 
regard to the duties of financial analysts: 
What Financial Analysts Do 
Financial analysts provide guidance to businesses and individuals making investment 
decisions. They assess the performance of stocks, bonds, and other types of 
investments. 
Duties 
Financial analysts typically do the following: 
• Recommend individual investments and collections of investments, which are 
known as portfolios 
• Evaluate current and historical data 
• Study economic and business trends 
• Study a company's financial statements to determine its value 
• Meet with company officials to gain better insight into the company's 
prospects and management 
• Prepare written reports 
• Meet with investors to explain recommendations 
Financial analysts evaluate investment opportunities. They work in banks, pension 
funds, mutual· funds, securities firms, insurance companies, and other businesses. 
They are also called securities analysts and investment analysts. 
Financial analysts can be divided into two categories: buy-side analysts and sell-side 
analysts. 
• Buy-side analysts develop investment strategies for companies that have a lot 
of money to invest. These companies, called institutional investors, include 
mutual funds, hedge funds, insurance companies, independent money 
managers, and nonprofit organizations with large endowments, such as some 
universities. 
• Sell-side analysts advise financial services sales agents who sell stocks, bonds, 
and other investments. 
Some analysts work for the business media and belong to neither the buy side nor the 
sell side. 
Financial analysts generally focus on trends affecting a specific industry, 
geographical region, or type of product. For example, an analyst may focus on a 
subject area such as the energy industry, a world region such as Eastern Europe, or 
(b)(6)
Page 9 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
the foreign exchange market. They must understand how new regulations, policies, 
and political and economic trends may affect investments. 
Investing is becoming more global, and some financial analysts specialize in a 
particular country or region. Companies want those financial analysts to understand 
the language, culture, business environment, and political conditions in the country or 
region that they cover. 
The following are examples of types of financial analysts: 
Portfolio managers supervise a team of analysts and select the mix of products, 
industries, and regions for their company's investment portfolio. These managers not 
only are responsible for the overall portfolio, but also are expected to explain 
investment decisions and strategies in meetings with investors. 
Fund managers work exclusively with hedge funds or mutual funds. Both fund and 
portfolio managers frequently make split-second buy or sell decisions in reaction to 
quickly changing market conditions. 
Ratings analysts evaluate the ability of companies or governments to pay their debts, 
including bonds. On the basis of their evaluation, a management team rates the risk of 
a company or government not being able to repay its bonds. 
Risk analysts evaluate the risk in investment decisions and determine how to manage 
unpredictability and limit potential losses. This job is carried out by making 
investment decisions such as selecting dissimilar stocks or having a combination of 
stocks, bonds, and mutual funds in a portfolio. 
U.S. Dep't of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2014-15 ed., 
"Financial Analysts," http://www .bls.gov /ooh/business-and-financial/financial-analysts.htm#tab-2 
(last visited May 14, 2015). 
Some of the duties attributed to the proffered position in April 15, 2014 letter have 
not been shown to actually be related to a financial analyst position in the petitioner's operations. In 
a letter dated April 15, 2014, the petitioner describes itself as "primarily in the business of providing 
quality India phone cards and calling cards online." The record contains insufficient evidence that 
the beneficiary, in the proffered position within the context of the petitioner's operations, a small firm 
selling telephone calling cards, would perform the claimed duties of the proffered position. For 
example, the petitioner stated that the beneficiary would be involved in "[p]lanning, organizing, 
directing, controlling and evaluating the operations of financial operations"; however, while the 
evidence includes copies of invoices, a payroll summary, Form W-2s, and the petitioner's 2013 
112 0S, U.S. Income Tax Return for an S Corporation, there are insufficient details in the record of 
the financial operations of the petitioner and what is required for "[p]lanning, organizing, directing, 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 10 
controlling and evaluating" it.4 The duties described have not been demonstrated to be duties that 
would be performed by a financial analyst in the context of the petitioner's operations. As such, the 
substantive nature of the work the beneficiary would actually perform if the visa petition were 
approved has not been demonstrated. 
The evidence does not establish the substantive nature of the work to be performed by the 
beneficiary which precludes a finding that the proffered position is a specialty occupation under 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. However, in order to reach 
the petitioner's assertions pertinent to financial analyst positions, we will continue our analysis based 
on the assumption, made arguendo, that the proffered position is a financial analyst position. 
The Handbook states the following about the educational requirements of financial analyst positions: 
How to Become a Financial Analyst 
Financial analysts typically must have a bachelor's degree, but a master's degree is 
often required for advanced positions. 
Education 
Most positions require a bachelor's degree. A number of fields of study provide 
appropriate preparation, including accounting, economics, finance, statistics, 
mathematics, and engineering. For advanced positions, employers often require a 
master's in business administration (MBA) or a master's degree in finance. 
Knowledge of options pricing, bond valuation, and risk management are important. 
Licenses, Certifications, and Registrations 
The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) is the main licensing 
organization for the securities industry. It requires licenses for many financial analyst 
4 It is noted that a review of the 2013 Form W-2s for 37 employees reveals that 14 employees received less 
than $2000, 14 employees received between $2000 and $3000, 4 employees received between $3100 and 
$6155, and the remaining employees received $15,326.66, $16,666.66, $52,575, $62,728, and $63,715.44. 
There is no explanation in the record for why 32 of the 37 employees received less than $10,000 in wages in 
2013. 
(b)(6)
Page 11 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISI01 
positions. Most of the licenses require sponsorship by an employer, so companies do 
not expect individuals to have these licenses before starting a job. 
Certification is often recommended by employers and can improve the chances for 
advancement. An example is the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) certification 
from the CFA Institute, which financial analysts can get if they have a bachelor's 
degree, 4 years of experience, and pass three exams. Financial analysts can also 
become certified in their field of specialty. 
Advancement 
Financial analysts typically start by specializing in a specific investment field. As 
they gain experience, they can become portfolio managers, who supervise a team of 
analysts and select the mix of investments for the company's portfolio. They can also 
become fund managers, who manage large investment portfolios for individual 
investors. A master's degree in finance or business administration can improve an 
analyst's chances of advancing to one of these positions. 
Important Qualities 
Analytical skills. Financial analysts must process a range of information in finding 
profitable investments. 
Communication skills. Financial analysts must explain their recommendations to 
clients in clear language that clients can easily understand. 
Computer skills. Financial analysts must be adept at using software packages to 
analyze financial data, see trends, create portfolios, and make forecasts. 
Decision making skills. Financial analysts must provide a recommendation to buy, 
hold, or sell a security. Fund managers must make split-second trading decisions. 
Detail oriented. Financial analysts must pay attention to details when reviewing 
possible investments, as small issues may have large implications for the health of an 
investment. 
Math skills. Financial analysts use mathematical skills when estimating the value of 
financial securities. 
To be successful, financial analysts must be motivated to seek out obscure 
information that may be important to the investment. Many work independently and 
must have self-confidence in their judgment. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 12 
!d. at htt p://www .bls.gov/ooh/business-and-financial/financial-analysts.htm#tab-4 (last visited May 
14, 2015). 
When reviewing the Handbook, we must note again that the petitioner designated the wage level of 
the proffered position as a Level I position on the LCA. This designation is indicative of a 
comparatively low, entry-level position relative to others within the occupation and signifies that the 
beneficiary is only expected to possess a basic understanding of the occupation and carries 
expectations that the beneficiary perform routine tasks that require limited, if any, exercise of 
judgment; that [he/she] would be closely supervised; that [his/her] work would be closely monitored 
and reviewed for accuracy; and that [he/she] would receive specific instructions on required tasks 
and expected results.5 Furthermore, DOL guidance indicates that a Level I designation is 
appropriate for a position as a research fellow, a worker in training, or an intern. 
We note that the Handbook indicates that a bachelor's degree is the typical entry-level requirement 
for financial analysts; however, it does not indicate that a degree in a specific specialty is normally 
the minimum requirement for entry into these positions. The Handbook reports that a "number of 
fields of study provide appropriate preparation" such as "accounting, economics, finance, statistics, 
mathematics, and engineering." While we recognize that statistics and mathematics are related fields 
of study, there is insufficient evidence in the record establishing that accounting, economics, finance, 
statistics, mathematics, and engineering, constitute a specific specialty. 
In general, provided the specialties are closely related, e.g., chemistry and biochemistry, a minimum 
of a bachelor's or higher degree in more than one specialty is recognized as satisfying the "degree in 
the specific specialty" requirement of section 21 4(i)(l)( B) of the Act. In such a case, the required 
"body of highly specialized knowledge" would essentially be the same. Since there must be a close 
correlation between the required "body of highly specialized knowledge" and the position, a 
minimum entry requirement of a degree in disparate fields, such as accounting and engineering, 
would not meet the statutory requirement that the degree be "in the specific specialty (or its 
equivalent)," unless the petitioner establishes how each field is directly related to the duties and 
responsibilities of the particular position such that the required "body of highly specialized 
knowledge" is essentially an amalgamation of these different specialties. Section 21 4(i)(1 )(B) of the 
Act (emphasis added). 
Furthermore, the Handbook indicates that some employers require a master's degree in business 
administration. Although a general-purpose bachelor's or master's degree, such as a degree in 
business administration, may be a legitimate prerequisite for a particular position, the acceptance of 
such a degree, without more, will not justify a finding that a particular position qualifies for 
classification as a specialty occupation. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Chertoff, 484 F.3d 139, 147 (1st 
5 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 DECISION 
Page 13 
Cir. 2007).6 Therefore, the Handbook's recognition that a general, non-specialty degree in business 
administration is sufficient for entry into the occupation strongly suggests that a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty is not normally the minimum entry requirement for this 
occupation. Accordingly, as the Handbook indicates that entry into the financial analyst occupation 
does not normally require a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, the Handbook 
does not support the proffered position as being a specialty occupation. Even if it did, the record 
lacks sufficient evidence to support a finding that the particular position proffered here (an entry­
level position in comparison to others within the occupation), would normally have such a minimum, 
specialty degree requirement or its equivalent. 
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 
provisions 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. 
We note that the petitioner has provided printouts from various websites and the O*NET financial 
analyst summary report. The printouts from 
have not been demonstrated to be authoritative and do not cite any sources for their conclusions. 
More to the point, though, the content from indicate that 
an otherwise unspecified bachelor's degree in business administration may be a sufficient 
educational qualification for a financial analyst position. 
As was explained above, an educational requirement that may be satisfied by either a bachelor's or a 
master's degree in business administration, without further specification, is not a requirement of a 
minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. Two of the three printouts 
6 Specifically, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit explained in Royal Siam that: 
I 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, mquiring such a degree, without more, will not justify the granting 
of a petition for an H-1B specialty occupation visa. See, e.g., Tapis Int'l v. INS, 94 F.Supp.2d 
172, 175-76 (D.Mass.2 000); 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. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 14 
the petitioner relies upon make clear that a financial analyst position does not require a minimum of a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. They indicate, therefore, that a financial 
analyst position may not qualify as a specialty occupation position. The petitioner did not attempt to 
reconcile the information in those two printouts with the information in the website, nor 
did the petitioner assert that the information should be considered more persuasive than 
the information from the other two websites. As such, the website printouts, considered together, do 
not support the proposition that the proffered position, even if it were found to be a financial analyst 
position, would require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. 
The O*NET summary report also does not support the petitioner's position. As was observed above, 
O*NET places financial analyst positions in Job Zone Four, which indicates that it is included 
among occupations of which most, but not all, require a bachelor's degree. 7 Further, it does not 
indicate that the degrees that may be required by some Job Zone Four positions must necessarily be 
in any specific specialty. O*NET does not, therefore, support the proposition that financial analyst 
positions require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. 
Therefore, even if the proffered position were found to be a financial analyst position, O*NET 
would not support the position that it is a specialty occupation position. 
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 finance, bookkeeping, and other fields, 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. Even if the petitioner's description of the duties of the proffered 
position were found to be accurate, it would not demonstrate that the proffered position qualifies as a 
specialty occupation position by virtue of requiring a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent. 
In the instant matter, the petitioner has not established that the proffered position falls under an 
occupational category for which the Handbook (or other objective, authoritative source) indicates 
that at least a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the 
minimum requirement for entry into the occupation. Furthermore, the duties and requirements of the 
proffered position as described in the record of proceeding do not indicate that the position is one for 
which a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the 
minimum requirement for entry. Thus, the petitioner did not satisfy the criterion at 8 C.P.R. 
§ 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)( A)(l) . 
Next, we will review the record regarding the first of the two alternative prongs of 8 C.P.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. 
7 For an explanation of Job Zones, see http://www.onetonline. org/help/online/zones. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 15 
In determining whether there is such a common degree requirement, factors often considered by US CIS 
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, 71 2 F. Supp. 1095, 11 02 (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. Also, 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." 
As was noted above, the petitioner did provide 16 vacancy announcements. 8 Those vacancy 
announcements are for positions entitled, "Financial Analyst, " "S enior Financial Analyst, " "Lead 
Financial Analyst IT and Labs, " "Sr Analyst Financial Systems, " "Financial Planning & Reporting 
Analyst," "Finance Analyst," and "Senior Financial Analyst (Revenue Modeling)." 
We observe, first, that the petitioner has not demonstrated that the proffered position is a financial 
analyst position. As such, the educational requirements stated in those vacancy announcements have 
not been shown to be relevant to the educational requirements of the proffered position. However, 
we continue our discussion of those vacancy announcements based on the arguendo assumption 
discussed above. 
8 Although the size of the relevant study population is unknown, the evidence does not demonstrate what 
statistically valid inferences, if any, can be drawn from the job postings with regard to the common 
educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations. See generally Earl Babbie, 
The Practice of Social Research 186-228 (1995). Moreover, given that there is no indication that the 
advertisements were randomly selected, the validity of any such inferences could not be accurately 
determined even if the sampling unit were sufficiently large. See id. at 195-196 (explaining that "[r]andom 
selection is the key to [the] process [of probability sampling]" and that "random selection offers access to the 
body of probability theory, which provides the basis for estimates of population parameters and estimates of 
error"). 
As such, even if the job announcements supported the finding that the position requires a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent, it cannot be found that such a limited number of postings that 
appear to have been consciously selected could credibly refute the findings of the Handbook published by the 
Bureau of Labor Statistics that such a position does not require at least a baccalaureate degree in a specific 
specialty for entry into the occupation in the United States. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 16 
The petitioner stated, on the LCA, that the proffered position is a wage Level I position, that is, an 
entry-level position for an employee who has only basic understanding of the occupation. 9 In order 
to attempt to show that parallel positions require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty or its equivalent, the petitioner would be obliged to demonstrate that other wage Level I 
positions require such a specialized degree. 
Some of the vacancy announcements provided, however, are for positions described as "Senior" and 
"Lead. " Those positions are unlikely to be wage Level I positions. Further, most of the vacancy 
announcements state an experience requirement, and some require a considerable amount of very 
specific experience. The positions they announce also appear not to be wage Level I positions. The 
vacancy announcements that have not been shown to pertain to wage Level I positions have not been 
shown to have any direct relevance to any material issue in this matter. 
Some of the vacancy announcements indicate that the required or preferred education for the 
positions they announce is a degree in business administration which, as was explained above, is not 
a requirement of a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. 
Some of the vacancy announcements state a requirement of a bachelor's degree "or equivalent 
experience," but do not identify the type and amount of experience the hiring authority would 
consider to be equivalent to the otherwise requisite bachelor's degree. 
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 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." To begin with and as discussed previously, 
the petitioner itself does not require at least a baccalaureate degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. In addition, the record does not credibly demonstrate exactly what the beneficiary will 
do on a day-to-day basis such that complexity or uniqueness can even be determined. Furthermore, 
the record does not sufficiently develop relative complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the 
proffered position of financial analyst. 
Specifically, even though the petitioner claims that the proffered position 's duties are so complex and 
unique that a bachelor's degree is required, the petitioner does not demonstrate how the described 
duties 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 
9 See U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevai ling Wage Determination Policy Guidance, 
Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta. 
gov/pdf/NPWHC _Guidance_ Revised _11_ 2009.pdf for an explanation of wage levels. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 17 
leading to a specialty degree and did not establish how such a curriculum is necessary to perform the 
duties it claims are so complex and unique. While a few courses in business and finance may be 
beneficial in performing certain duties of a financial analyst 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 proffered. 
Therefore, the evidence of record does not establish that this position is significantly different from 
other financial analyst positions such that it refutes the Handbook's information to the effect that 
there is a spectrum of preferred degrees acceptable for financial analyst 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 financial analyst or other 
closely related positions that can be performed by persons without at least a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty or its equivalent. Consequently, as the petitioner does not demonstrate how the 
proffered position of financial analyst is so complex or unique relative to other financial analyst 
positions 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.F.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 10 
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. 
In his April 15 , 2014 letter, stated that the proffered position requires a bachelor's 
degree, but that a bachelor's degree in business administration, without further specification, would 
satisfy the petitioner's educational requirement. In an August 5, 2014 letter, counsel asserted that the 
petitioner has "multiple" financial analysts and has always filled its financial analyst positions with 
applicants with a bachelor's degree in business administration or a closely related subject. We 
observe, first, that the petitioner provided no documentary evidence to corroborate that it presently 
employs or has previously employed financial analysts or, if it has, that they have each had a 
minimum of a bachelor's degree, let alone a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. 
While a petitioner may assert that a proffered position requires a degree in a specific specialty, that 
statement 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, 
1° Further, as was also noted above, the LCA submitted in support of the visa petition is approved for a wage 
Level I position, an indication that the proffered position is an entry-level position for an employee who has 
only a basic understanding of such positions. Even if the proffered position were found to be a financial 
analyst position, this would 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 Handbook 
suggests that some financial analyst positions do not require such a degree. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 18 
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, 201 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 21 4(i)(l) of the 
Act; 8 C.F .R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(ii) (defining the term "specialty occupation "). Here, the petitioner has 
not established the referenced criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 21 4.2( h)(4)(iii)(A)(3) based on its normal hiring 
practices. 
Further, although the petitiOner has steadfastly asserted that the proffered position requires a 
bachelor's degree, it has just as consistently indicated that the requisite degree may be in business 
administration, without further specification. As was explained above, that is not a requirement of a 
minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. 
For both reasons, the petitioner has not demonstrated that it normally requires a minimum of a 
bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent for the proffered position, and has not 
satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3). 
Finally, the petitioner has not satisfied the fourth criterion of 8 C.P.R. § 214.2 (h)(4)(iii)(A), which is 
reserved for positions with specific duties so specialized and complex that their performance 
requires knowledge that 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. In other words, the 
proposed duties have not been described with sufficient specificity to show that they are more 
specialized and complex than financial analyst positions that are not usually associated with at least 
a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 11 
For the reasons discussed above, the evidence of record does not satisfy the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214. 2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)( 4). 
11 
Even assuming that the proffered position is a financial analyst position, the duties as described lack 
sufficient specificity to distinguish the proffered position from other financial analyst positions for which a 
bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is not required to perform their duties. 
Moreover, the petitioner has designated the proffered position as a Level I position on the submitted LCA, 
indicating that it is an entry-level position for an employee who has only basic understanding of the 
occupation. See U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing Wage Determination Policy 
Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), ava ilable at http://www.foreignlaborcert. 
doleta. gov/pdf/NPWHC_Guidance_Revised _1 1_2009.pdf. Therefore, it is not credible that the position is 
one with specialized and complex duties, as such a higher-level position would be classified as a Level III or 
Level IV positio n, requiring a significantly higher prevailing wage. It is incumbent upon the petitioner to 
resolve any inconsistenc ies 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). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 19 
The petitioner has not established that it has satisfied any of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 21 4.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) and, therefore, it cannot be found that the proffered position qualifies as a 
specialty occupation. The visa petition must be denied for this reason. 
IV. BENEFICIARY QUALIFICATIONS 
A. The Law 
As was noted above, section 21 4(i)(l) of the Act 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 degree referenced by section 21 4(i)(l)(B) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 11 84(i)(1)(B), means one in a 
specific specialty that is characterized by a body of highly specialized knowledge that must be 
theoretically and practically applied in performing the duties of the proffered position. 
A bachelor's degree does not, per se, qualify a beneficiary for employment in a specialty 
occupation. Rather, the position must require a degree in a specific specialty. Cf Matter of Michael 
Hertz) Assoc. , 19 I&N Dec. 558,560 (Comm'r 19 88). Further, the beneficiary must have a degree in 
that specific specialty. See Matter of Ling, 13 I&N Dec. 35 (R.C. 196 8). 
Section 21 4(i)(2) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 11 84(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 (1 )(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. 
In implementing section 21 4(i)(2) of the Act, 8 U.S.C . § 11 84(i)(2), the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(C) states that an alien must also meet one of the fol lowing criteria in order to 
qualify to perform services in a specialty occupation: 
(b)(6)
Page 20 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
(1) 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 fully practice the specialty occupation and be immediately 
engaged in that specialty in the state of intended employment; or 
(4) Have [a] education, specialized training, and/or progressively responsible 
experience that is equivalent to completion of a United States baccalaureate or 
higher degree in the specialty occupation, and [b] have recognition of expertise 
in the specialty through progressively responsible positions directly related to 
the specialty. 
In addition, 8 C.P.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(v)(A) states: 
General. If an occupation requires a state or local license for an individual to fully 
perform the duties of the occupation, an alien (except an H- lC nurse) seeking H 
classification in that occupation must have that license prior to approval of the 
petition to be found qualified to enter the United States and immediately engage in 
employment in the occupation. 
Therefore, to qualify an alien for classification as an H- lB nonimmigrant worker under the Act, the 
petitioner must establish that the beneficiary possesses the requisite license or, if none is required, 
that he or she has completed a degree in the specialty that the occupation require s. Alternatively, if a 
license is not required and if the beneficiary does not possess the required U.S. degree or its foreign 
degree equivalent, the petitioner must show that the beneficiary possesses both (1) education, 
specialized training, and/or progressively responsible experience in the specialty equivalent to the 
completion of such degree, and (2) recognition of expertise in the specialty through progressively 
responsible positions relating to the specialty. 
In order to equate a beneficiary's credentials to a U.S. baccalaureate or higher degree, the provisions 
at 8 C.P.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(D) require one or more of the following: 
(1) 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 
(b)(6)
Page 21 
(3) 
(4) 
(5) 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Noncollegiate Sponsored Instruction (PONSI); 
An evaluation of education by a reliable credentials evaluation service which 
specializes in evaluating foreign educational credentials;12 
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; 
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 .... 
In accordance with 8 C.F.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5): 
For purposes of determining equivalency to a baccalaureate degree in the 
specialty, three years of specialized training and/or work experience must be 
demonstrated for each year of college-level training the alien lacks .... It must be 
clearly demonstrated that the alien's training and/or work experience included the 
theoretical and practical application of specialized knowledge required by the 
specialty occupation; that the alien's experience was gained while working with 
peers, supervisors, or subordinates who have a degree or its equivalent in the 
specialty occupation; and that the alien has recognition of expertise in the 
specialty evidenced by at least one type of documentation such as: 
(i) Recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation by at least two 
recognized authorities in the same specialty occupation;13 
(ii) Membership in a recognized foreign or United States asso c iation or 
society in the specialty occupation; 
12 
The petitioner should note that, in accordance with this provisio n, we will accept a credential evaluation 
service's evaluation of education only, not training and/or work experience. 
13 Recognized authority means a person or organization with expertise in a particular field, special skills or 
knowledge in that field, and the expertise to render the type of opinion requested. 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). 
A recognized authority 's opinion must state: (1) the writer's qualifications as an expert; (2) the writer's 
experience giving such opinions, citing specific instances where past opinions have been accepted as 
authoritative and by whom; (3) how the conclusions were reached; and (4) the basis for the conclusions 
supported by copies or citations of any research material used. I d. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 22 
(iii) Published material by or about the alien in professional publications, trade 
journals, books, or ma jor newspapers; 
(iv) Licensure or registration to practice the specialty occupation in a foreign 
country; or 
(v) Achievements which a recognized authority has determined to be 
significant contributions to the field of the specialty occupation. 
It is always worth noting that, by its very terms, 8 C.P.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5) is a matter strictly 
for USCIS application and determination, and that, also by the clear terms of the rule, experience 
will merit a positive determination only to the extent that the record of proceeding establishes all of 
the qualifying elements at 8 C.P.R. § 214. 2(h)(4)(iii)(D)( 5) - including, but not limited to, a type of 
recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation. 
B. Evidence Pertinent to the Benef iciary's Qualifications 
With the visa petition, the petitioner submitted evidence that the beneficiary received a three-year 
bachelor of commerce degree in financial accounting and auditing from 
_ 
m 
India. The petitioner also submitted evidence pertinent to the beneficiary's work experience . 
The evidence oertinent to the beneficiary's employment history includes three letters from 
_ 
India. The first (undated) letter which was submitted with the Form 1-12 9 
states that the beneficiary worked as an "Accountant of Auditing" with that company from May 1, 
2004 to June 11, 200714 and that he performed the following duties: 
1. Prepare financial statements and reports for clients of company management. 
2. Record the amount and money spend and received daily by clients or company 
management. 
3. Ensure compliance with relevant legislation[.] 
4. Analyze how well a business is performing financially[.] 
5. Assist management with strategic planning and human resources. 
The second (undated) letter which was submitted in response to the RFE is similar to the previous 
employment verification letter, but does not contain the duty description. 
The third employment verification letter from dated September 26, 2014, is 
similar to the previous letters, except that it is on different letterhead and contains the following 
expanded description of the duties performed by the beneficiary in that position: 
14 The employment verification letter states that the beneficiary was employed with from 1.5.2004 to 
11.6.2007. In a letter dated August 5, 2014, counsel confirmed that the beneficiary had worked in that 
position from May 1, 2014 to June 11, 2007. 
(b)(6)
Page 23 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISIOJ 
Financial Records: 
o He prepared and examined quarterly and annual financial statements and 
records of the Company. 
o Ensured that they were accurate and that taxes are paid properly and on time. 
o He was also are responsible for budgeting, performance evaluation, cost 
management, and asset management. 
o Prepared asset, liability, and capital account entries. 
o Documented financial account transactions. 
o Recommended financial actions. 
o Summarized current financial status and presents results. 
o Ensure that statements and records comply with laws and regulations 
Accounting & Auditing: 
o Substantiated financial transactions by auditing documents. 
o Maintained accounting controls by preparing and recommending policies and 
procedures. 
o Reconciled financial discrepancies. 
o Verified documentation, prepares payments, and requests disbursements. 
o Ensured compliance with federal state and local financial legal requirements. 
o Prepared special financial reports. 
o He assisted with annual interim audit & external audit. 
o He assessed whether the level of internal control for financial reporting within 
an organization is adequate to lower or eliminate the risk of accounting errors 
or fraud. 
o His responsibility was to auditing financial data by making a comparison of 
income and expenses· and the balance in asset and liability accounts from 
month to month, based on the financial statements. 
o He played an active role in the monthly account analysis like Prepaid 
Expenses, Deposits, Accrued Expenses, Investments, Capital Leases, 
Members Equity, Inter-company balances, Journal Entries including 
maintenance of recurring journal entries and allocations. 
o He complied and sorted documents such as: invoices, work orders, checks, 
vouchers, and substantiates business transactions. 
Financial Operation: 
o He worked to establish goals and objectives for each year and monitor and 
advise on the progress to enhance the professional development of staff. 
o He prepared daily reports to assess financial operations and worked to ensure 
that organization runs efficiently. 
o Improved business efficiency where money is concerned. 
o Made best-practices recommendations to management. 
(b)(6)
Page 24 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
o Suggested ways to reduce costs, enhance revenues and improve profits. 
[Verbatim.] 
An evaluation in the record, prepared by dated 
March 29, 2010, states that the beneficiary's three years of academic coursework and examinations at 
the and his employment experience, considered together, are equivalent to a 
U.S. bachelor's degree in business administration. Mr. states that "rb lecause of the positions 
fhe holds l at the and the 
: [he has] the authority to grant college-level 
credit for training, and/or courses taken at other U.S. or international universities. "15 
A letter from Dr. dated January 10, 2007, indicates that on the date of that letter, 
who provided the evaluation of the beneficiary's qualifications, was a professor and 
area chair at the It states: 
The has a program which acknowledges credit based upon the 
work experience of students and applicants; this Prior Learning Assessment process 
determines if learning received outside of the traditional university classroom is 
equivalent to academic curriculum and eligible for college credit through the 
evaluation of a student's portfolio. 
It further states: 
Included within Professor capacity as an Area Chair and a Faculty, are the 
review of credentials of existing and prospective faculty and the evaluation of 
students in the fields of Business Administration, Marketing, Management 
Information Systems, Computer Science and other related areas. As part of these 
capacities Professor has proven to be a reliable evaluator and has consistently 
delivered appropriate evaluations for credit-bearing purposes. 
A letter from Dr. dated March 12 , 2010 letter states: 
This letter confirms that Professor , a full-time faculty member in the 
BBA Program in Design and Management at 
reviews the academic and professional credentials of prospective international 
students and faculty who apply for admission and employment, respectivel y, at 
Specifically, Professor reviews credentials in the fields of 
Business, Economics, Computer Information Systems, Management, Information 
Systems, and other related areas. He also evaluates work experience in order to 
15 The evaluation contains a notation that Mr. 
Design and Management, 
is also a Visiting Assistant Professor in the Department of 
for Design. 
(b)(6)
Page 25 
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
determine academic equivalence, for the purpose of awarding appropriate transfer 
credit. 
A more recent letter regarding Professor 
That letter states, in pertinent part: 
is from and dated February 19, 2014. 
This letter is to confirm that Professor is the Director of the graduate 
program MS Strategic Design and Management at for 
Design. As such, he reviews the academic credentials of prospective applicants, 
transfer students, and prospective faculty. He frequently deals with international 
credentials and is relied upon to determine the academic equivalency of degrees and 
transcripts from educational systems outside the United States. 
Additionally, because of his academic and professional background he reviews work 
experience in the fields of Business, Management Information Systems, Economics, 
Computer Information Systems, Accounting, Management, and other related areas for 
the purpose of awarding relevant credits and graduate admission. Professor is 
experienced in evaluating relevant work experience in order to determine their 
academic equivalence, and to authorize that credit be awarded by 
when appropriate. has divisions that allow for credit to be awarded 
based on experience. 
The petitioner also submitted several Internet printouts. One of the printouts provided was taken 
from the website. It states, inter alia, that in applying for Federal jobs, nine months of 
experience is considered equivalent to a year of academic study.16 
Another printout is from the website of Virginia. It states that, in applying for a job 
with that county's government, one year of employment experience is considered equivalent to one 
year of academic study. 
C. Analysis 
As was observed above, the petitioner relies on the beneficiary's 3- year bachelor's degree and the 
beneficiary's employment experience, considered together, as the basis for its contention that the 
beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of a specialty occupation. 
We observe that if the petitioner had demonstrated that the proffered position required a minimum of 
a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent, the petitioner would be obliged, in order 
for the visa petition to be approvable, to demonstrate, not only that the beneficiary has a bachelor's 
16 We note that the printout does not state a source for that asserted equivalence. Further, it 
makes that claim pertinent to qualificatio ns for Federal employment, not specialty occupation positions 
pursuant to the statutes and regulations applicable to H-lB status. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 26 
degree or its equivalent, but that the beneficiary has a mm1mum of a bachelor's degree or its 
equivalent in that specific specialty. See Matter of Ling, 13 I&N Dec. 35 (Reg. Comm'r 19 68). 
evaluation states that the beneficiary's three-year degree and his employment 
experience, considered together, are equivalent to a U.S . bachelor's degree in business 
administration. As explained above, however, an otherwise unspecified bachelor's degree in 
business administration is not a degree in a specific specialty. That evaluation does not, therefore, 
state that the beneficiary has a minimum of a bachelor's degree in any specific specialty or its 
equivalent, and does not demonstrate, nor even effectively allege, that the beneficiary is qualified to 
work in any specialty occupation position.17 
Pursuant to the instant visa category, however, a beneficiary's credentials to perform a particular job 
are relevant only when the job is found to qualify as a specialty occupation. As discussed in this 
decision, the proffered position has not been shown to require a baccalaureate or higher degree in a 
specific specialty, or its equivalent, and has not, therefore, been shown to qualify as a position in a 
specialty occupation. 
Because the finding that the petitioner did not demonstrate that the proffered position qualifies as a 
specialty occupation position is dispositive, we need not further address the issue of the beneficiary's 
qualifications. 
V. CONCLUSION 
An application or petition that does not comply with the technical requirements of the law may be 
denied by us even if the service center does not identify all of the grounds for denial in the initial 
decision. See Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1025, 10 43 (E.D. Cal. 
2001), affd, 345 F.3d 683 (9th Cir. 2003); see also Soltane v. DOJ, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3 d Cir. 2004) 
(noting that we conducts appellate review on a de novo basis). 
Moreover, when we deny a petition on multiple alternative grounds, a plaintiff can succeed on a 
challenge only if it shows that we abused our discretion with respect to all of our enumerated 
grounds. See Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, 229 F. Supp. 2d at 1043 , affd. 345 F.3d 
683. 
The petition will be denied and the appeal dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each 
considered as an independent and alternative basis for the decision. In visa petition proceedings, it is 
17 We also observe that, pursuant to 8 C.P.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(l), set out above, in order to sat isfy 
evidentiary requirements an evaluation of education and experience, considered together, must be performed 
by an evaluator with authority to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience in the soecialty at an 
accredited college or university. The evidence in the instant case does not show that has such 
authority. As such, even if the evaluation provided had asserted that the beneficiary's education and 
experience, considered together, are equivalent to a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, it 
would not be competent evidence of that assertion pursuant to the salient regulations. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 27 
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 20 13). Here, that burden has 
not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.