dismissed H-1B Case: Travel/Marketing

merit ekarfy unww 
hadon of persona1 primy 
PUBLIC COry 
U.S. Department of Homeland SecuriQ 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: EAC 03 149 53837 Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: J UN 0 5 2006 
IN RE: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 l(a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
Robert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
EAC 03 149 53g37 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the nonimrnigrant 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 travel agency that seeks to employ the beneficiary as a marketing assistant. The petitioner 
endeavors to classify the beneficiary as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to 
$ 10 1 (a)( 15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. $ 1 10 1 (a)(l 5)(H)(i)(b). 
The director denied the petition because the proffered position is not a specialty occupation. On appeal, the 
petitioner submits a brief. 
It is noted that the record contains no properly filed G-28. The G-28, Notice of Entry of Appearance as 
Attorney or Representative, has not been filed by the petitioner's counsel. As such, the petitioner's counsel is 
not recognized in this proceeding. 
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. 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. fj 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualifjr 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. 8 214.2(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 proffered position. 
The record of proceeding before the AAO contains: (1) Form 1-129 and supporting documentation; (2) the 
director's request for additional evidence; (3) the petitioner's response to the director's request; (4) the 
director's denial letter; and (5) Form I-290B and supporting documentation. The AAO reviewed the record in 
its entirety before issuing its decision. 
EAC 03 149 53837 
Page 3 
The petitioner is seeking the beneficiary's services as a marketing assistant. Evidence of the beneficiary's 
duties includes: the 1-129 petition; the petitioner's March 17, 2003 letter in support of the petition; and the 
petitioner's response to the director's request for evidence. According to this evidence, the beneficiary would 
perform duties that entail: assisting in managing the business and the program budget; monitoring financial 
operations; developing marketing activities to promote and increase tourist package sales in Latin American 
embassies and international organizations located in Washington, D.C.; and coordinating marketing activities 
through advertising, direct mailing, printing, and customer events. The petitioner indicated that a qualified 
candidate for the job would possess a bachelor's degree. 
The director found that the proffered position was not a specialty occupation because the proposed duties are 
not so complex as to require a baccalaureate degree in a related field. The director found further that the 
petitioner failed to establish any of the criteria found at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
On appeal, the petitioner states, in part, that the proffered position is that of a manager, a position that 
qualifies as a specialty occupation. The petitioner cites various published decisions including Arctic Catering 
Inc. v. Thornburgh, 769 F. Supp. 1 167 (D.Colo. 1991) in support of its claim. 
Upon review of the record, the petitioner has established none of the four criteria outlined in 
8 C.F.R. 5 2 14.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). Therefore, the proffered position is not a specialty occupation. 
The AAO turns first to the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l) and (2): a baccalaureate or higher 
degree or its equivalent is the normal minimum requirement for entry into the particular position; a degree 
requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations; or a particular 
position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with a degree. 
Factors often considered by CIS when determining these criteria include: whether the Department of Labor's 
Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) reports that the industry requires a degree; whether 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 11 5 1, 1165 (D. Minn. 1999)(quoting HiraYBlaker Corp. v. Sava, 712 F. 
Supp. 1095,1102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). 
The AAO routinely consults the Handbook for its information about the duties and educational requirements of 
particular occupations. The AAO does not concur with the petitioner that the proffered position, which combines 
the duties of a marketing manager with a travel agent, is a specialty occupation. A review of the Advertising, 
Marketing, Promotions, Public Relations, and Sales Managers job descriptions in the Handbook, 2006-2007 
edition, finds no evidence indicating that a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, 
is required for a marketing manager job. A wide range of educational backgrounds is suitable, but many 
employers prefer related experience and a broad liberal arts background. A review of the Travel Agents category 
in the Handbook finds no evidence indicating that a baccalaureate or higher degree, or its equivalent, is required 
for a travel agent job. The minimum requirement is a high school diploma or equivalent. Moreover, although the 
petitioner claims that it has two employees and a gross annual income of $381,055.95, the record contains no 
evidence in support of these claims such as federal income tax returns and quarterly wage reports. Going on 
record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of meeting the burden of proof 
in these proceedings. Matter of SofJici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft 
of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg. Comm. 1972)). 
EAC 03 149 53837 
Page 4 
It is also noted that Arctic Catering, Inc. v. Thornburgh, 769 F.Supp. 1167 (D.Colo. 1991) dealt with a 
general manager of a business catering to the needs of workers at geophysical drilling and mining camps in 
remote regions. The petitioner has not demonstrated that the proffered position is similar to the position 
described in the published decision. As such, the record does not contain any persuasive evidence regarding 
parallel positions in the petitioner's industry. 
The record also does not include any evidence from firms, individuals, or professional associations regarding 
an industry standard, or documentation to support the complexity or uniqueness of the proffered position. The 
petitioner, therefore, has not established the criteria set forth at 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(I) or (2). 
The AAO now turns to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3) - the employer normally requires a 
degree or its equivalent for the position. As the record indicates that the proffered position is a new position, the 
petitioner, therefore, has not established the criterion set forth at 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(3). 
Finally, the AAO turns to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. $214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(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. 
To the extent that they are depicted in the record, the duties do not appear so specialized and complex as to 
require the highly specialized knowledge associated with a baccalaureate or higher degree, or its equivalent, 
in a specific specialty. Therefore, the evidence does not establish that the proffered position is a specialty 
occupation under 8 C.F.R. $ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). 
As related in the discussion above, the petitioner has failed to establish that the proffered position is a 
specialty occupation. Accordingly, the AAO shall not disturb the director's denial of the petition. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 29 1 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 136 1. 
The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.