dismissed H-1B Case: Textiles

identi- cka &Wba 
prevent clearly unwmmted 
invasion of pemonrJ privacy 
1J.S. Department of Ilomeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: WAC 04 201 50133 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: MAR 2 7 2006 
IN RE: 
PETITION: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 10l(a)(l S)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS : 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned 
to the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
Administrative Appeals dffice 
WAC 04 201 50133 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the nonimmigrant visa petition and the matter is now 
before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be dismissed. The petition 
will be denied. 
The petitioner is a textile company that seeks to employ the beneficiary as a management analyst and to 
classify her as a nonimrnigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to section lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b). 
The director denied the petition on the basis that the position is not a specialty occupation. On appeal, 
counsel submits a brief. 
Section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. tj 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. 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. tj 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty occupation, the position must meet one 
of the following criteria: 
(I) 
 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. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) interprets the term "degree" in the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
tj 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to mean not just any bachelor's or higher degree, but one in a specific field of study 
that is directly related to the proposed position. 
The record of proceeding before the AAO contains, in part: (1) Form 1-129 with supporting documents; 
(2) the director's denial letter; and (3) Form I-290B with the attached brief and documents. The AAO 
reviewed the record in its entirety before issuing its decision. 
WAC 04 201 50133 
Page 3 
The Form 1-129 listed the proposed job title as management analyst. The petitioner's company support 
letter filed with the Form 1-129 indicated that the beneficiary would spend her time performing the 
following duties: 
Analyzing work problems, implementing and analyzing the effects of new 
procedures, such as those involving organizational changes, communication and 
information flow, integrated production methods, inventory control, cost analysis 
and utilization of technologically advanced business methods; 
collecting, reviewing and analyzing information and relevant data, which 
includes annual revenues and expenditures; 
organizing and documenting findings on studies conducted and preparing 
recommendations to management for implementation of new systems or 
procedure; 
preparing work simplification studies, operations and procedures manuals to 
assist management in operating more efficiently and effectively; 
adopting operations research technology to recommend improvements in 
operation; 
performing systems analysis; 
gathering and analyzing information and data on past sales to predict future sales 
and marketing trends; 
interpreting data concerning expenditures, price and future trends through daily 
statistical reports; 
compiling information; 
keeping informed on price trends and manufacturing processes; and 
preparing analysis reports on market conditions. 
The petitioner stated that the position required the beneficiary to have a bachelor's degree in commercial 
relations, business administration, or another closely related discipline. 
The director found the duties of the proposed position to clearly reflect a combination of those performed 
by a management analyst and a marketing manager, but denied the petition based on his determination 
that the record failed to establish that the beneficiary would actually perform the proposed duties. The 
director also noted that the petitioner's operations did not have the scope or complexity to require the 
services of a management analyst and that its business was not of the type in which management analysts 
would be employed on a full- or part-time basis for any length of time. 
On appeal, counsel asserts that the size of the petitioner's business should not determine whether or not 
the position is a specialty occupation. Counsel further asserts that the marketing duties of the position are 
incidental not primary duties. Finally, counsel maintains that the proposed position is that of a 
management analyst and that it meets two criteria of the specialty occupation definition in the Act. 
The petitioner need only satisfy one of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to show that a position 
is a specialty occupation. Upon review of the record, the AAO finds that the petitioner has not 
established any of the criteria outlined in 8 C.F.R. ij 214,2(h)(4)(iii)(A). Therefore, the proposed position 
is not a specialty occupation. 
WAC 04 201 50133 
Page 4 
To determine whether a position qualifies as a specialty occupation, CIS looks beyond the title of the 
position and determines, from a review of the duties of the position and any supporting evidence, whether 
the position actually requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized 
knowledge and the attainment of a bachelor's degree in a specific field of study as the minimum for entry 
into the occupation as required by the Act. 
The AAO routinely consults the Department of Labor's Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) for 
its information about the duties and educational requirements of particular occupations. The petitioner 
has identified the proposed position as that of a management analyst. Therefore, the AAO turns first to 
the Handbook's discussion of that occupational title: 
Management analysts, often referred to as management consultants in private industry, 
analyze and propose ways to improve an organization's structure, efficiency, or profits. 
For example, a small but rapidly growing company that needs help improving the system 
of control over inventories and expenses may decide to employ a consultant . . . . 
Firms providing management analysis range in size from a single practitioner to large 
international organizations employing thousands of consultants. Some analysts and 
consultants specialize in a specific industry, such as healthcare . . . while others specialize 
by type of business function . . . . The work of management analysts and consultants 
varies with each client or employer, and from project to project . . . . In all cases, analysts 
and consultants collect, review, and analyze information in order to make 
recommendations to managers . . . . 
After obtaining an assignment or contract, management analysts first define the nature 
and extent of the problem. During this phase, they analyze relevant data, which may 
include annual revenues, employment, or expenditures, and interview managers and 
employees while observing their operations. The analyst or consultant then develops 
solutions to the problem. In the course of preparing their recommendations, they take 
into account the nature of the organization, the relationship it has with others in the 
industry, and its internal organization and culture . . . . 
Once they have decided on a course of action, consultants report their findings and 
recommendations to the client. These suggestions usually are submitted in writing . . . . 
For some projects, management analysts are retained to help implement the suggestions 
they have made. 
The AAO finds the director to have erred in concluding that the duties of the proposed position reflect 
those of a combination of management analyst duties and marketing management duties. The AAO 
agrees, however, with the director that the record does not establish that the petitioner will employ the 
beneficiary as a management analyst. The petitioner's description of the proposed duties is reflected in 
the Handbook's discussion on the duties of management analysts. The petitioner's description outlines 
the type of duties generally performed by management analysts, rather than the actual tasks to be 
performed by the beneficiary in relation to the petitioner's textile business. On appeal, counsel does not 
specifically break down and describe the duties in relation to the petitioner's business, but simply lists the 
same set of general duties. The AAO requires information regarding the specific responsibilities of a 
proposed position to make its determination regarding the nature of that position and its degree 
requirements, if any. See Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F. 3d 384 (5th Cir. 2000). Without such information, 
WAC 04 201 50133 
Page 5 
the AAO is unable to determine the tasks to be performed by the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis and, 
therefore, whether the proposed position's duties are of sufficient complexity to require a degree or its 
equivalent. As the record in the instant case offers no meaningful description of the proposed position's 
responsibilities, the petitioner has not established either that the duties of the position are those of a 
management analyst or that their performance would normally impose a degree requirement or its 
equivalent on the beneficiary. Without more specific documentation of the day-to-day services the 
beneficiary is expected to provide the petitioner, the AAO cannot analyze whether the beneficiary will be 
performing the duties of a management analyst. Likewise, the lack of meaningful information about the 
substantive work the beneficiary would actually perform precludes the AAO from reasonably concluding 
that the proposed position meets any of the specialty occupation criteria at 8 C.F.R. 9 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
Thus, the petitioner has failed to establish that the position is one that qualifies as a specialty occupation 
under the first criterion at 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(I)- a bachelor's or higher degree or its equivalent, 
in a specific field of study is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the particular position. 
The petitioner asserts, without substantiating evidence, that a bachelor's degree or higher is the normal 
minimum requirement for entry into this position. The petitioner indicates that it is an importer and 
distributor of textiles and fine fabrics since 1989, employs 10 people, and has a gross income of $3.5 
million. The petitioner indicates that it has been making significant growth and is a thriving multi-million 
dollar global business. There is no documentation of record corroborating the petitioner's statements. 
The petitioner has not submitted tax returns, company brochures, wage records, or other business 
information. Without a business context, the AAO is unable to determine the scope of the beneficiary's 
duties. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of 
meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Sofici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Cornrn. 1998) 
(citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). 
The AAO turns next to the first alternative prong of the second criterion at 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) - 
a specific degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. 
To determine if a position is a specialty occupation under this criterion, CIS generally considers whether 
or not letters or affidavits from companies or individuals in the industry attest that such companies 
"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. Suva, 712 F. Supp. 1095, 1 102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). As 
already discussed, the information about the proposed duties is too general to align the position with any 
occupation for which the Handbook reports employers normally require at least a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty. Also, there are no submissions from individuals, other firms, or professional associations 
in the petitioner's industry. Therefore, the proposed position does not qualify as a specialty occupation 
under the first alternative prong at 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
The AAO turns next to the third criterion at 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3) - the employer normally 
requires a degree or its equivalent for the position. In the instant case, this criterion is not a factor as the 
petitioner has not submitted evidence to establish a history of hiring individuals with specialized degrees for 
similar positions and implies, on appeal, that this a newly created position. 
Finally, the AAO turns to the criteria related to the complexity, uniqueness, or specialized nature of the 
proposed position. A petitioner satisfies the second alternative prong of the second criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
$ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) if it establishes that a particular position is so complex or unique that it can be 
performed only by an individual with a bachelor's degree in a specific field of study. The criterion at 
8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4) requires a petitioner to establish that the nature of the specific duties is so 
specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform the duties is usually associated with the 
WAC 04 201 50133 
Page 6 
attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific field of study. Again, the petitioner has failed to 
provide concrete information about the specific day-to-day tasks that the beneficiary would perform and 
about the specific slulls and competencies that she would need to apply. On appeal, counsel asserts that the 
nature of the specific duties of the proposed position is so specialized and complex that the knowledge 
required to perform the duties is usually associated with the attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree. 
Counsel did not submit evidence to establish that the proposed position is a specialty occupation based on 
its complexity, uniqueness, or specialized nature. Without documentary evidence to support the claim, 
the assertions of counsel will not satisfy the petitioner's burden of proof. The unsupported assertions of 
counsel do not constitute evidence. Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533, 534 (BIA 1988); Matter of 
Laureano, 19 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 1983); Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. 503, 506 (BIA 1980). 
No evidence contained in the record demonstrates that the proposed position is a specialty occupation. 
The burden of proving eligibility for the benefit sought remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 
of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.