remanded H-1B Case: Computer Systems Analysis

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8419173 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : JAN. 27, 2020 
The Petitioner, a medical device company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as an "MES 
functional analyst" under the H-lB 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)(15)(H)(i)(b). 
The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record does not 
establish that the Beneficiary is qualified for the proffered position. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts 
that the Director erred in the decision . 
While we conduct de novo review on appeal, we conclude that a remand is warranted in this case 
because the Director's decision is insufficient for review. Specifically, the Director is 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. 1 Cf 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].") . 
As presently constituted, the record does not demonstrate that the proffered position qualifies as a 
specialty occupation. See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) . The Petitioner has not provided sufficient 
documentation from a probative, authoritative source to substantiate its assertion regarding the 
minimum requirement for entry into this particular position. The labor condition application (LCA)2 
submitted in support of the H-lB petition classifies the proffered position as being located within the 
occupational category of "Computer Systems Analysts" corresponding to the Standard Occupational 
Classification (SOC) code 15-1121. We reviewed the Handbook's subchapter entitled "How to 
1 Though the Director's decision references its discussion that the Petitioner has not established the proffered position as 
a specialty occupation, the decision letter does not actually contain such a discussion. Instead, the Director's discussion 
solely focuses on the Beneficiaiy's qualifications. 
2 A petitioner submits the LCA to DOL to demonstrate that it will pay an H-lB 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 duties, experience, and qualifications. Section 212(n)(l) of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 655.731 (a). 
Become a Computer Systems Analyst," which states, in pertinent part, that "a bachelor's degree in a 
computer or information science field is common, although not always a requirement." 3 According 
to the Handbook, some firms hire analysts with business or liberal arts degrees, many analysts have 
technical degrees, and many analysts gain programming or technical expertise elsewhere. 4 Further, 
the Handbook does not specify a degree level ( e.g., associate' s degree) for these business, technical, 
and liberal arts degrees. Similarly, the DOL's Occupational Information Network (O*NET) summary 
report for "Computer Systems Analysts" under SOC 15-1121.00 does not indicate that a bachelor's 
degree in a specific specialty, or the equivalent, is normally required. It states that "most of these 
occupations require a four-year bachelor's degree, but some do not." 5 Therefore, the Handbook and 
O*NET do not support the assertion that at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its 
equivalent, is normally the minimum requirement for these positions. 
Accordingly, the matter will be remanded to the Director to consider the specialty-occupation issue 
and enter a new decision. The Director may request any additional evidence considered pertinent to 
the new determination and any other issue. As such, we express no opinion regarding the ultimate 
resolution of this case on remand. 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for the entry of a 
new decision consistent with the foregoing analysis. 
3 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Computer Systems Analysts, 
https :/ /www. b ls. gov/ooh/ computer-and-in form a ti on-techno 1 ogy/ computer-systems-analysts. htm#tab-4 (last visited 
Jan. 24, 2020). 
4 Id. 
5 For additional information, see the O*NET Online Help webpage available at http://www.onetonline.org/help/ 
online/svp. 
2