dismissed H-1B Case: Veterinary Medicine

identieing data deleted to 
prevent clearly unw-ted 
invasion of personal privacy 
PUBLIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: WAC 04 800 57625 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: AUG 0 2 2006 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 10 1 (a)(l S)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 9 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the ~'dministrative 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. 
*adz* 
Robert P. Wiemann, 
L Administrative ~~~ealw6ffice 
WAC 04 800 57625 
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 veterinary hospital that seeks to employ the beneficiary as a veterinary technician. The 
petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to 
5 10 1 (a)( 1 5)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 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, 
counsel submits a brief. 
Section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 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. 5 214.2(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. 5 214.2(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. 
The petitioner is seeking the beneficiary's services as a veterinary technician. Evidence of the beneficiary's 
duties includes: the 1-129 petition; the petitioner's September 2, 2004 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 
WAC 04 800 57625 
Page 3 
perform duties that entail: performing medical tests in a laboratory environment for use in the treatment and 
diagnosis of diseases in animals; preparing vaccines and serums for the prevention of diseases; preparing 
tissue samples; taking blood samples; executing laboratory tests, such as urinalyses and blood counts; 
cleaning and sterilizing instruments and materials; maintaining equipment and machines; monitoring patients 
during and after surgical procedures; performing EKGs; and taking blood pressure measurements and 
radiographs. Although not explicitly stated, it appears that the petitioner requires a baccalaureate or higher 
degree in veterinary medicine for the proffered position. 
The director found that the proffered veterinary technician position was not a specialty occupation. Citing to 
the Department of Labor's Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook), 2004-2005 edition, the director 
noted that the minimum requirement for entry into the position was not a baccalaureate degree or its 
equivalent in a specific specialty. The director found further that the petitioner failed to establish any of the 
criteria found at 8 C.F.R. § 2 14.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
On appeal, counsel states, in part, that the proffered position combines the duties of a veterinary 
microbiologist with a veterinary pathologist, and is more complex than a veterinary technician position. 
According to counsel, the proposed duties, such as conducting medical tests in a laboratory environment for 
use in the treatment and diagnosis of diseases, are so specialized and complex as to require a baccalaureate or 
higher degree. 
Upon review of the record, the petitioner has established none of the four criteria outlined in 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(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. 9 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(I) 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 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 115 1, 1165 (D. 
Minn. 1999)(quoting HirdIBlaker Corp. v. Suva, 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 counsel that the proffered position is that of a veterinary 
microbiologist and a veterinary pathologist. The beneficiary's proposed job duties do not entail the level of 
responsibility of either occupation. Further, the specific nature of and the scope of the proposed performance of 
"medical tests in a laboratory environment for use in treatment and diagnosis of diseases" have not been defined. 
Simply going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for the purpose 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)). 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). A review of the Veterinary Technologists and Technicians occupational category in the 
WAC 04 800 57625 
Page 4 
Handbook, 2006-2007 edition, confirms the accuracy of the director's assessment to the effect that the job duties 
parallel the responsibilities of a veterinary technician. No evidence in the Handbook indicates that a baccalaureate 
or higher degree, or its equivalent, is normally required for a veterinary technician job. 
The record does not include any 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 counsel does not address this issue on appeal, it will not be discussed 
further. The evidence of record does not establish this criterion. 
Finally, the AAO turns to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. tj 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). The information in the record about the proposed duties 
does not establish that they exceed in scope, specialization, or complexity those usually performed by 
veterinary technicians, an occupational category for which the Handbook indicates no requirement for or usual 
association with a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty. 
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 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. tj 1361. 
The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. The petition is denied.