remanded H-1B Case: Data Science

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 17744277 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : AUG . 30, 2021 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a "data scientist" 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 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 Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the Beneficiary was qualified to perform the services of the specialty occupation 
position. The matter is now before us on appeal. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director's 
decision was in error. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Section 291 of the Act; Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec . 369, 375 (AAO 2010). We review this 
matter de nova. See Matter of Christo 's Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de nova 
review , we will withdraw the decision of the Director and remand the matter for entry of a new 
decision. 
The Director denied the petition under 8 C.F.R. § 214 .2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5) . However, the Petitioner is 
seeking approval under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(l). We will therefore withdraw the Director 's 
decision and remand the matter so that the Director may consider the issue of the Beneficiary's 
qualifications anew and conduct a first-line adjudication under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(l). As 
he reviews the evaluation submitted for consideration under 8 C.F.R. § 214 .2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(l), the 
Director should also consider the letters of record pertaining to the Beneficiary's work experience 
because his statement that "[n]o other materials are on the record with regard to the job duties of the 
beneficiary's previous employment" was not correct. 
ORDER: The matter is remanded for the entry of a new decision consistent with the foregoing 
analysis, which, if adverse, shall be certified to us for review .