remanded H-1B Case: E-Commerce

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF N- INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: AUG. 21,2017 
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 "category 
manager" 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 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Upon review, the Director's decision will be withdrawn and the petition will be remanded for entry 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. C.Y Matter qf 
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 qualities 
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 category manager will be responsible for 
planning and coordinating the activities of buyers, merchandisers, and purchasing officers involved 
in purchasing products and services required for e-commerce. The Petitioner provided the following 
job duties for the proffered position: 
• Assist with developing effective plans for specific category lines to meet achieved 
budgeted goals in sales, margin, operating profit, customer acquisition, 
repurchase, retention and customer satisfaction; 
• Represent [the Petitioner] in negotiating contracts and formulating policies with 
suppliers and vendors; 
• Coordinate activities of personnel engaged in and selecting and buying products 
and supplies; 
• Locate vendors of products and supplies, and confer with them to determine 
product availability and terms of sales as well as product roadmap; 
• Manage vendors and suppliers to ensure that they comply with the terms and 
conditions of the contract; 
• Communicate with vendors, and others to stay abreast of e-commerce rindustry 
and identifY potential business opportunities; 
• Prepare and process requisitions and purchase orders for products and supplies; 
• Analyze [the Petitioner's] customers' demographic features and purchase 
behaviors and maintain established vendor relationships; 
• Collect and analyze business intelligence data from various VF-related reports 
summarizing purchasing, accounting, business, logistical, financial, and economic 
data for review by upper management through multiple [of the Petitioner's] 
internal IT system such as Business Intelligence (BI) System, BI Query Studio, 
Purchase Order (PO) System, Sales Order (SO) System, Item Maintain (IM) 
System, and [the Petitioner's] Report Manager; 
• Identify potential new products using internal IT systems, such as ElMS, EDI, 
and BI system; and 
• Improve and monitor supply chain inefficiencies. 
According to the Petitioner, the proffered position requires a bachelor's degree, or equivalent, in 
business administration, management, economics, advertising, communications, statistics, 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 qualifies for classification as a specialty 
occupation.1 Accordingly, the Director should review this issue on remand. 
A. Legal Framework 
Section 214(i)(l) ofthe 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 criteri~ 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 inean 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. Chertoff, 484 F.3d 139, 147 (1st Cir. 2007) (describing 
"a degree requirep1ent 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. 
Specifically, the record does not establish that the job duties require an educational background, or 
its equivalent, commensurate with a specialty occupation.
2 
1. Minimum Requirements for Proffered Position 
First, the Petitioner's claim that a bachelor's degree in business administration is sufficient for the 
proffered position is inadequate to establish that it qualifies as a specialty occupation. A petitioner 
must demonstrate that the proffered position requires a precise and specific course of study that 
relates directly and closely to the position in question. There must be a close correlation between the 
required specialized studies and the position; thus, the mere requirement of a general degree, such as 
business administration, without further specification, does not establish the position as a specialty 
occupation. C.f Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. 558, 560 (Comm'r 1988) ("The mere 
requirement of a college degree for the sake of general education, or to obtain what an employer 
perceives to be a higher caliber employee, also does not establish eligibility."). 
Thus, while a general-purpose bachelor's degree in business administration may be a legitimate 
prerequisite for a particular position, requiring such a degree, without more, will not justify a finding 
that a particular position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. Royal Siam Corp., 484 
F.3d at 147.3 
Second, the Petitioner stated that a degree in one of several disparate fields (specifically: business 
administration, economics, advertising, communications, or statistics) is sufficient for the position. 
In general, provided the specialties are closely related, e.g., finance and accounting, a minimum of a 
bachelor's or 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 degrees in disparate fields (e.g., 
economics and advertising; statistics and communications), 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 
2 Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap, we will address each of the criteria individually. 
3 A general degree requirement does not necessarily preclude a proffered position from qualifying as a specialty 
occupation. For example, an entry requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in bus.iness administration with a 
concentration in a specific field, or a bachelor's or higher degree in business administration combined with relevant 
education, training, and/or experience may, in certain instances, qualify the proffered position as a specialty 
occupation. In either case, it must be demonstrated that the entry requirement is equivalent to a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proffered position. 
4 
Matter of N- Inc. 
pos1t10n such that the required "body of highly specialized knowledge" is essentially an 
amalgamation of these different specialties.4 Section 214(i)(1 )(B) of the Act (emphasis added). The 
Petitioner has not made this showing. 
On the basis of the proffered position's educational requirement, we cannot conclude that the 
proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation. 
2. First Criterion 
We now tum to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l), 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. 5 
On the labor condition application (LCA)6 submitted in support of the H-1 B petition, the Petitioner 
designated the proffered position under the occupational category "Purchasing Managers" 
corresponding to the Standard Occupational Classification code 11-3061.7 
4 While the statutory "the" and the regulatory "a" both denote a singular "specialty," we do not so narrowly interpret 
these provisions to exclude positions from qualifying as specialty occupations if they permit, as a minimum entry 
requirement, degrees in more than one closely related specialty. See section 214(i)(l )(B) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)( 4)(ii). This also includes even seemingly disparate specialties providing, again, the evidence of record 
establishes how each acceptable, specific field of study is directly related to the duties and responsibilities of the 
particular position. 
5 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. 
6 
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, 26I&N Dec. 542, 545-46 (AAO 2015). 
7 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 he 
will be closely supervised and his work closely monitored and reviewed for accuracy; and (3) that he will receive 
specific instructions on required tasks and expected results. U.-S. Dep't of Labor, Emp't & Training Admin., Prevailing 
Wage Determination Policy Guidance, Nonagric. Immigration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009), available at 
http://flcdatacenter.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. 
5 
Matter of N- Inc. 
The Handbook subchapter entitled "How to Become a Purchasing Manager" states, in pertinent part, 
that purchasing managers usually have a bachelor's or higher degree.8 However, the Handbook does 
not specify whether the degree must be in a specific field of study. To qualify as a specialty 
occupation, the Petitioner must demonstrate that a degree in a specific specialty that is directly 
related to the proposed position is required. We have consistently stated that, although a general­
purpose bachelor's degree may be a legitimate prerequisite for a particular position, requiring such a 
degree, without more, will not justify a finding that a particular position qualifies for classification as 
a specialty occupation. Royal Siam Corp., 484 F.3d at 147. 
The narrative of the Handbook further reports that some employees obtain professional certification 
to demonstrate a level of professional competency. We reviewed the American Purchasing Society's 
website, which states that Certified Purchasing Professional candidacy is open to those in purchasing 
materials management or executive positions who have ( 1) a minimum of three years of purchasing 
related experience; or (2) a degree (level not specified) plus two years of purchasing related 
experience.9 The website also states that certification may be awarded to an individual who does not 
have the minimum requirements of ·formal education. 10 The website provides the following 
information about the benefits of certification: 
Executives need the assurance that their purchasing and supply chain managers and 
buyers are adequately trained, reliable, and dedicated to their professions. 
There is a growing realization in the business world that only professionals can get 
the job done in a professional manner. The American Purchasing Society award of 
certification provides general management a high degree of confidence in the ability 
and integrity of the people who have been or will be selected to do the job. 
Also, there is ample precedent reflecting the benefits of professional certification in 
the history of other areas of business operation, such as engineering, accounting, law, 
computer engineering, etc. 
The American Purchasing Society emphasizes that the credentialing program establishes an 
objective measure of an individual's knowledge and proficiency, and encourages professional 
development. The website does not indicate that the these positions have any particular academic 
requirements for entry, nor does it indicate that these positions require any particular level of 
education to be identified as qualified and possessing a level of expertise/competence. 
8 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Purchasing Managers (20 16-17 ed.). 
9 
For additional information, see the American Purchasing Society website located at https://american­
purchasing.com/page.php?Page!D=7. 
10 !d. 
6 
Matter of N- Inc . 
. Thus, the Handbook's report and the American Purchasing Society website do not suppmi the claim 
that a position by virtue of simply falling under this occupational category qualities as a specialty 
occupation. 
On appeal, the Petitioner references DOL's Occupational Information Network (O*NET) summary 
report for "Purchasing Managers." We reviewed the summary report and note that it provides 
general information regarding the occupation. It does not, however, support the Petitioner's 
assertion regarding the educational requirements for these positions. 
We will first focus on the Specialized Vocational Preparation (SVP) rating. DOL designates the 
occupation "Purchasing Managers" as having an SVP 7 < 8. This indicates that the occupation 
requires "over 2 years up to and including 4 years" of training. While the SVP rating provides the 
total number of years of vocational preparation required for a particular position, it is important to 
note that it does not describe how those years are to be divided among training, formal education, 
and experience- and it does not specify the particular type of degree, if any, that a position would 
. II 
reqmre. 
Next we will address DOL's designation in the summary report of the occupation as a Job Zone 
Four. Similar to the SVP rating, the summary report does not indicate that any academic credentials 
for Job Zone Four occupations must be directly related to the duties performed. 
Finally, we note that the summary report provides the educational requirements of "respondents," 
but does not account for 100% of the "respondents." The respondents' positions within the 
occupation are not distinguished by career level (e.g., entry-level, mid-level, senior-level). 
Additionally, the graph in the summary report does not indicate that the "education level" for the 
respondents must be in a specific specialty. 
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)(l) requires. 
3. 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. 
11 
For additional information, see the O*NET Online Help webpage available at http://www.onetonline.org/help/ 
online/svp. 
7 
Matter of N- Inc. 
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 
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. 
I999)(quotingHird/BlakerCorp. v. Sava, 712F. 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 source) 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." 
Thus, based upon a complete review of the record of proceedings, we find that the Petitioner has not 
satisfied the first alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2). 
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 "Purchasing Managers" 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 an advanced degree in a specific specialty, or 
8 
.
Matter of N- Inc. 
its equivalent, for entry. Similarly, however, a Level IV wage-designation would not ret1ect 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)(l) ofthe Act. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits an opinion letter authored by In his letter, 
( 1) describes the credentials that he asserts qualify him to opine upon the nature of the proffered 
position; (2) lists the duties proposed for the Beneficiary; and (3) states that these duties require at 
least a bachelor's degree in business administration, management, economics, advertising, 
communications, statistics, or a related field (or the equivalent). We carefully evaluated 
assertions in support of the instant petition but, for the following reasons, determined his letter does 
not have significant weight in this matter. 
First, expertise, regarding current industry degree requirements for purchasing manager 
positions is not established in the record. His supporting documentation indicates that most of his 
experience has been in an academic setting as a faculty member focusing on marketing courses 
within a university. His most recent publication was in 2011 (on an issue unrelated to the matter 
here) and he does not provide any dates or specific information to indicate any recent relevant 
consulting work in the Petitioner's area of business. 
Moreover, has not provided sufficient information to establish his expertise on the 
practices of organizations seeking to hire purchasing managers. Without further clarification, it is 
unclear how his education, training, skills, or experience would translate to expertise regarding the 
. current recruiting and hiring practices of an enterpris~ engaged in "online computer/electronics 
products" (as designated by the Petitioner in the petition) or similar organizations for purchasing 
managers (or parallel positions). 
states that his assessment is based upon a description provided by the Petitioner of the 
company and the offered position. While provides a brief, general description of the 
Petitioner's business activities, he does not demonstrate in-depth knowledge of its operations or how 
the duties of the position would actually be performed in the context of its business enterprise. 
Further, opinion letter does not substantiate his conclusions, such that we can conclude 
that the Petitioner has met its burden of proof. While he does reference O*NET and the Handbook 
when considering the duties of the proffered position, we have already discussed that neither the 
Handbook nor O*NET report an industry-wide requirement for at least a bachelor's degree in a 
specific specialty, 
or its equivalent. Thus, again, we incorporate by reference the previous 
discussion on the matter. Further, does not reference, cite, or discuss any other materials 
such as studies, surveys, industry publications, authoritative publications, or other sources of 
empirical information which he may have consulted to complete his evaluation. 
9 
.
Matter of N- Inc. 
The record does not indicate whether was aware that, as indicated by the Level I wage on 
the LCA, the Petitioner considered the proffered position to be for an employee who is expected to 
have a basic understanding of the occupation that requires limited, if any, exercise of judgment, 
close supervision, close monitoring of work for accuracy, and specific instructions on required tasks 
and expected results. Rather, states that the proffered position is of strategic importance 
to the Petitioner's business; is necessary for such an organization to perform the tasks of developing 
and implementing effective marketing, product management, and vendor management; requires a 
sophisticated understanding of market analysis, marketing, marketing management, product 
management, and vendor management; and is responsible for the development, implementation, and 
evaluation of strategies, plans, and activities for marketing, for product management, and for vendor 
management. The Petitioner has not demonstrated that possessed the requisite 
information to adequately assess the nature of the position and appropriately determine parallel 
positions based upon the job duties and level of responsibilities. 
For the reasons discussed, we find that Mr. Karns' opinion letter lends little probative value to the 
matter here. Matter of Caron Int'l, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm 'r 1988) (The service is not 
required to accept or may give less weight to an advisory opinion when it is "not in accord with 
other information or is in any way questionable."). 
The present record does not meet the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2). 
4. 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 proff~red position. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
5. 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. 
We reviewed the Petitioner's statements about the proffered position, along with evidence in the record 
of proceedings. 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. Further, 
10 
Matter of N- Inc. 
while a few related courses may be beneficial in performing certain duties of the position, the Petitioner 
has not demonstrated how an established curriculum of such courses leading to a baccalaureate or 
higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, is required to perform the duties of the proffered 
position. 
The Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary is well qualified for the positiOn, and references his 
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 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. 
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 of N- Inc., ID# 488489 (AAO Aug. 21, 20 17) 
II