remanded H-1B Case: Business Systems Analysis

MATTER OF N-, INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JUNE 29,2017 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, an online retailer, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a "business systems 
analyst" under the H-IB nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b). The H-lB 
program allows a U.S. employer to temporarily employ a qualified foreign worker in a position that 
requires both (a) the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge 
and (b) the attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent) as 
a minimum prerequisite for entry into the position. 
The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did 
not establish that the Beneficiary is qualified to serve in a specialty occupation position in 
accordance with the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. 
In its appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and asserts that the Beneficiary is qualified 
to serve in a specialty occupation position. 
Upon review, the Director's decision will be withdrawn and the petition will be remanded for entry 
of a new decision. 
I. BENEFICIARY'S QUALIFICATIONS 
We are required to follow long-standing legal standards and determine first, whether the proffered 
position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation, and second, whether the Beneficiary 
was qualified for the position at the time the nonimmigrant visa petition was filed. (f Matter of 
Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. 558, 560 (Comm'r 1988) ("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]."). 
In the instant case, the record of proceedings does not establish that the proffered position qualifies 
as a specialty occupation. Thus, the matter will be remanded to the Director for review and issuance 
of a new decision. 
Matter of N-, Inc. 
II. PROFFERED POSITION 
In its letter of support, the Petitioner stated that the business systems analyst will be responsible for 
performing analysis and evaluation of its internal e-commerce systems as well as performing 
systems management and integration functions. The Petitioner provided the following job duties for 
the proffered position: 
• Communicate with internal users to formulate system requirements; 
• Analyze user project proposals, identify omissions and errors in the requirements 
and conduct feasibility studies; 
• Provide system design recommendation based on studies; 
• Collaborate with engineers or software developers to select appropriate design 
solutions and ensure the compatibility of system applications; 
• Provide technical guidance and support for the system development and 
troubleshooting of systems; 
• Analyze and address business and marketing needs and communicate with 
company's internal users to develop software solutions to optimize operational 
efficiency; 
• Apply software life-cycle methodology and enforce compliance of company's 
standards to ensure quality; 
• Create and execute various project development plans and revise them 
accordingly; 
• Evaluate all phases of system analysis concepts, technologies, and methods to 
plan out the system and sub-systems' development; 
• Monitor systems operations to detect potential problems; 
• Maintain or update business intelligence tools, databases, dashboards, systems, 
and methods; 
• Document requirements and define the scope and objectives of e-commerce 
applications and formulate specific internal systems to parallel business strategies; 
• Analyze system information and provide alternative interface tlow and system 
workflow solutions to decision makers to recommend the most cost effective 
plan; 
• Gather and validate information by the programmer team to identify issues; 
• Collaborate with senior managers to identify and resolve user interface usability 
issues by collecting and analyzing related historical data; and 
• Develop proposals to improve consumer interface usability experiences on 
applications or mobile site. 
According to the Petitioner, the proffered position requires a bachelor's degree, or equivalent, in 
computer information systems, management information systems, or a related field. 
2 
Matter of N-, Inc. 
III. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION 
Although not addressed in the Director's decision, we conclude that the record, as presently 
constituted, does not establish that the proffered position qualities for classification as a specialty 
occupation. 1 Accordingly, the Director should review this issue on remand. 
A. Legal Framework 
Section 214(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 regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) largely restates this statutory definition, but adds a non­
exhaustive list of fields of endeavor. In addition, the regulations provide that the proffered position 
must meet one of the following criteria to qualify as a specialty occupation: 
(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. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). We have consistently interpreted the term "degree" to mean not just 
any baccalaureate or higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is directly related to the 
proposed position. See Royal Siam Corp. v. Cherto,tf; 484 F.3d 139, 147 (1st Cir. 2007) (describing 
"a degree requirement in a specific specialty" as "one that relates directly to the duties and 
responsibilities of a particular position"); Defensor v. Meissner, 201 F.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 2000). 
1 The Petitioner submitted documentation in support of the H-1 B petition, including evidence regarding the proffered 
position and its business operations. While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and 
considered each one. 
3 
Matter of N-, Inc. 
B. Analysis 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that the proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation.
2 
1. First Criterion 
We tum first to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(J), which requires that a baccalaureate 
or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for 
entry into the particular position. To inform this inquiry, we recognize the U.S. Department of 
Labor's (DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) as an authoritative source on the 
duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses.3 
On the labor condition application (LCA)4 submitted in support of the H-1 B petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the occupational category "Computer Systems Analysts" 
corresponding to the Standard Occupational Classification code 15-1121.5 
The Handbook subchapter entitled "How to Become a Computer Systems Analyst" states, in 
pertinent part: "A bachelor's degree in a computer or information science field is common, although 
not always a requirement. Some firms hire analysts with business or liberal arts degrees who have 
skills in information technology or computer programming." Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't 
of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Computer Systems Analysts (2016-17 ed.). The 
Handbook also states: "Although many computer systems analysts have technical degrees, such a 
2 Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap, we will address each of the criteria individually. 
3 All of our references are to the 2016-2017 edition of the Handbook, which may be accessed at the Internet site 
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/. We do not, however, maintain that the Handbook is the exclusive source of relevant 
information. That is, the occupational category designated by the Petitioner is considered as an aspect in establishing the 
general tasks and responsibilities of a proffered position, and we regularly review the Handbook on the duties and 
educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses. To satisfy the first criterion, however, the 
burden of proof remains on the Petitioner to submit sufficient evidence to support a finding that its particular position 
would normally have a minimum, specialty degree requirement, or its equivalent, for entry. 
4 The Petitioner is required to submit a certified LCA to us to demonstrate that it will pay an H-1 B worker the higher of 
either the prevailing wage for the occupational classification in the "area of employment" or the actual wage paid by the 
employer to other employees with similar experience and qualifications who are performing the same services. See 
Matter ofSimeio Solutions, LLC, 26 I&N Dec. 542, 545-46 (AAO 20 15). 
5 The Petitioner classified the proffered position at a Level I wage (the lowest of four assignable wage levels). We will 
consider this selection in our analysis of the position. The ''Prevailing Wage Determination Policy Guidance'' issued by 
the DOL provides a description of the wage levels. A Level I wage rate is generally appropriate for positions for which 
the Petitioner expects the Beneficiary to have a basic understanding of the occupation. This wage rate indicates: (I) that 
the Beneficiary will be expected to perform routine tasks that require limited, if any, exercise of judgment; (2) that she 
will be closely supervised and her work closely monitored and reviewed for accuracy; and (3) that she will receive 
specific instructions on required tasks and expected results. U.S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailinl{ 
Wal{e Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http://tlcdatacenter.com/download/NPWHC _Guidance_ Revised _II_ 2009.pdf A prevailing wage determination starts 
with an entry-level wage and progresses to a higher wage level after considering the experience, education, and skill 
requirements of the Petitioner's job opportunity. !d. 
4 
Matter of N-, Inc. 
degree is not always a requirement. Many analysts have liberal arts degrees and have gained 
programming or technical expertise elsewhere." !d. 
The Handbook indicates that a bachelor's degree in a computer or information science field may be 
common, but not that it is a requirement for entry into these jobs. In fact, this chapter reports that 
"many" computer systems analysts may only have liberal arts degrees and programming or technical 
experience, but does not further qualify the amount of experience needed. It also notes that many 
analysts have technical degrees, but does not specify a degree level (e.g., associate's degree) for 
these degrees. The Handbook further specifies that such a technical degree is not always a 
requirement. Thus, this passage reports that there are several paths for entry into the occupation. 6 
The present record does not establish that a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or 
its equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the position, as 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A)(J) requires. 
2. Second Criterion 
The second criterion presents two alternative prongs: "The degree requirement is common to the 
industry in parallel positions among similar organizations or, in the alternative, an employer may 
show that its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an 
individual with a degree[.]" 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong 
casts its gaze upon the common industry practice, while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the 
Petitioner's specific position. 
a. First Prong 
To satisfy this first prong of the second criterion, the Petitioner must establish that the "degree 
requirement" (i.e., a requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent) is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. 
In determining whether there is such a common degree requirement, factors we often consider 
include: whether the Handbook reports that the industry requires a degree; whether the industry's 
6 In addition, the Handbook indicates that baccalaureate degrees in various fields (e.g. computer or information science. 
or liberal arts) may be adequate for entry into this occupation. In general, provided the specialties are closely related 
(e.g., chemistry and biochemistry), a minimum of a bachelor's of higher degree in more than one specialty is recognized 
as satisfying the ''degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent)" requirement of section 214(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, 
however, a minimum entry requirement of a degree in disparate fields 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 214( i)( I )(b) of the Act. 
5 
Matter of N-, Inc. 
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, 712 F. Supp. 1095, 1102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). 
The Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one for which the Handbook (or other 
independent, authoritative sources) 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." 
The present record does not establish that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent, is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. 
b. Second Prong 
We will next consider the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2), which is 
satisfied if the Petitioner shows that its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be 
performed only by an individual with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent. 
In support of its assertion that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation, the 
Petitioner submitted a job description for the proffered position and information regarding its 
business operations. However, the Petitioner did not sufficiently develop relative complexity or 
uniqueness as an aspect of the duties of the position, and it did not identify any tasks that are so 
complex or unique that only a specifically degreed individual could perform them. 
Moreover, the Petitioner's designation of this position as a Level I, entry-level position located 
within the "Computer Systems Analyst'' occupational category does not support its claim that the 
position is particularly complex, specialized, or unique compared to other positions within the same 
occupation. Nevertheless, a Level I wage-designation does not preclude a proffered position from 
classification as a specialty occupation, just as a Level IV wage-designation does not definitively 
establish such a classification. In certain occupations (e.g., doctors or lawyers), a Level I, 
entry-level position would still require a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or 
its equivalent, for entry. Similarly, however, a Level IV wage-designation would not reflect that an 
occupation qualifies as a specialty occupation if that higher-level position does not have an entry 
requirement of at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. That is, a 
position's wage level designation may be a relevant factor but is not itself conclusive evidence that a 
proffered position meets the requirements of section 214(i)( 1) of the Act. 
Matter of N-, Inc. 
The Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary is well qualified for the position, and references the 
Beneficiary's qualifications. However, the test to establish a position as a specialty occupation is not 
the education or experience of a proposed beneficiary, but whether the position itself requires at least 
a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. The present record does not meet the 
second alternative prong of8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). 
3. Third Criterion 
The third criterion of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) entails an employer demonstrating that it 
normally requires a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, for the position. The 
Petitioner did not submit any evidence of previous or current employees in the same position as the 
Beneficiary's proffered position. Thus, the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to 
establish that it normally requires at least a bachelor's degree, or the equivalent, in a specific 
specialty for the proffered position. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
4. Fourth Criterion 
The fourth criterion at 8 C.F .R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)( A) requires a petitioner to establish that the nature 
of the specific duties is so specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform them is 
usually associated with the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or 
its equivalent. 
The job description submitted by the Petitioner does not establish that the duties are more specialized 
and complex than positions that are not usually associated with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty, or its equivalent. We refer to our earlier comments and findings with regard to the 
implication of the Petitioner's designation of the proffered position in the LCA as a Level I wage, and 
hence one not likely distinguishable by relatively specialized and complex duties. We have also 
reviewed the Petitioner's list ofjob duties for the proffered position. The Petitioner has not sufficiently 
explained how these duties require the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly 
specialized knowledge, and the attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or 
its equivalent) as a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States. 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that its proffered position is one with duties sufficiently specialized 
and complex to satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). 
The present record does not satisfy at least one of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
IV. CONCLUSION 
The Director's decision will be withdrawn as the present record does not establish that the Petitioner 
has met the threshold requirement that the proffered position is a specialty occupation, as section 
214(i)(l) of the Act requires. Because the Director did not address this deficiency, we will remand 
this matter to the Director for further action and entry of a new decision . 
..., 
Matter of N-, Inc. 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for further 
proceedings consistent with the foregoing opinion and for the entry of a new decision. 
Cite as Matter ofN-, Inc., ID# 488256 (AAO June 29, 2017)