remanded H-1B Case: Computer Engineering

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of persod privbcy 
PUBLIC copy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
FILE: LIN 04 002 70012 Office: NEBRASKA 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. 4 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS : 
This is the decision of the Administrative ~ppeals 0f6ce 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. 
,L Ro~%k2:2j$- 
Administrative Appe s Office 
LIN 04 002 50012 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the nonirnmigrant visa petition and the matter is now before 
the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The decision of the director will be withdrawn and the 
petition will be remanded for further consideration. 
The petitioner is an information technology and solutions business that seeks to extend its authorization to 
employ the beneficiary as a computer engineer. The petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as a 
nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation pursuant to 9 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 9 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b). 
The director denied the petition because the petitioner had not demonstrated that the proffered position is a 
specialty occupation. On appeal, counsel states that the contents of the director's denial do not correlate with 
the referenced petition, and requests a remand for proper consideration based on the true facts. Counsel states 
that the director's denial discusses a systems analyst position rather than a computer engineer position and 
discusses duties that are found nowhere in the record. 
The AAO agrees with counsel and finds that the director did not consider the evidence of record in his denial. 
The matter will be remanded to the director to make a new determination and to review all relevant issues. 
The director may request any additional evidence he deems necessary. The petitioner may also provide 
additional documentation within a reasonable period to be determined by the director. Upon receipt of all 
evidence and representations, the director will enter a new decision. 
ORDER: The decision of the director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded to him for further action and 
consideration consistent with the above discussion and entry of a new decision that, if adverse to 
the petitioner, is to be certified to the AAO for review.