remanded H-1B

remanded H-1B Case: Information Technology

๐Ÿ“… Date unknown ๐Ÿ‘ค Company ๐Ÿ“‚ Information Technology

Decision Summary

The Director initially denied the petition, concluding the evidence was insufficient to establish that the 'solution developer' position qualified as a specialty occupation. The petitioner submitted additional evidence on appeal, including project reports and contracts. The AAO remanded the matter for the Director to consider the new evidence and issue a new decision.

Criteria Discussed

Specialty Occupation

Sign up free to download the original PDF

View Full Decision Text
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 10158756 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG . 13, 2020 
The Petitioner, an information technology solutions provider, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a "solution developer" 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. 
ยง 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 Vermont Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the evidence was 
insufficient to establish that the Beneficiary will perform services in a specialty occupation for a 
requested period of intended employment, and therefore, the proffered position did not qualify as a 
specialty occupation. Upon de nova review, we will remand the matter for the entry of a new decision. 
The Petitioner submits additional evidence on appeal including project progress reports, invoices, and 
contracts. The Petitioner asserts that the evidence submitted establishes eligibility. Because the 
Director has not yet addressed the additional evidence, we shall return the matter for the Director to 
consider the Petitioner's claim anew. 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for the entry of a 
new decision. 
Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

Draft your H-1B petition with AAO precedents

MeritDraft uses real AAO decisions to generate compliant petition arguments tailored to your evidence.

Sign Up Free →

No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.