remanded H-1B Case: Information Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 6059650 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : JAN. 17, 2020 
The Petitioner, an eyewear retailer, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a "sr. director - IT, 
big data and consumer insights" under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101(a)(l5)(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 Beneficiary is 
not qualified to perform the duties of the proffered position. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the 
Director erred. 
While we conduct de nova 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. 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 contain sufficient evidence to establish the substantive 
nature of the proffered position, which must be resolved in order to determine whether the position 
qualifies as a specialty occupation . See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) . We first note that the 
Petitioner's requirement of "a bachelor's degree, or its equivalent, in Business Administration, 
Management Information Systems, or a closely related field" raises questions regarding whether the 
position qualifies as a specialty occupation . L Since there must be a close correlation between the 
1 The Petitioner notes the Beneficiary's experience in management positions at other companies prior to the petition filing. 
However , the Petitioner does not assert that the position requires such experience . Instead, the Petitioner asserts that the 
position requires a bachelor's or higher degree in business administration or management information systems, as provided 
above. 
required specialized studies and the position, the requirement of a degree with a generalized title, such 
as business administration, without farther specification, does not establish the position as a specialty 
occupation. Cf Matter of Michael Hertz Assocs., 19 I&N Dec. 558, 560 (Comm'r 1988). We have 
consistently stated that, although a general-purpose bachelor's degree, such as a degree in business 
administration, may be a legitimate prerequisite for a particular position, requiring such a degree, 
without more, will not justify a conclusion that a particular position qualifies for classification as a 
specialty occupation. Royal Siam Corp., 484 F.3d at 147. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner's inclusion of a bachelor's or higher degree in business administration as 
a qualification for the proffered position raise questions regarding whether the position belongs in the 
"Computer and Information Systems Manager" occupational category, corresponding to the standard 
occupational classification code 11-3021, as designated in the labor condition application (LCA)2 
submitted in support of the petition. We note that the subchapter of the Department of Labor (DOL)'s 
Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) states, in relevant part, that "[m]any organizations 
require their computer and information systems managers to have a graduate degree as well. A Master 
of Business Administration (MBA) is common." Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Labor, 
Occupational Outlook Handbook, Computer and Information Systems Managers, 
https ://www. bls. gov/ ooh/management/ computer-and-information-systems-managers.htm#tab-4 (last 
visited Jan. 16, 2020). However, the Handbook observes that those employers require such a degree 
in addition to, not in lieu of, a bachelor's degree in computer or information science, plus related work 
experience." Id. Therefore, the record raises questions regarding the substantive nature of the position 
and whether the Petitioner's designation of the position in the "Computer and Information Systems 
Manager" occupational category is appropriate, and consequently whether the LCA corresponds to the 
petition. 3 
We note that the record contains documents that the Petitioner describes as "examples of the work 
product of Sr. Director - IT, Big Data and Consumer Insights" including "feasibility plans and 
development guidelines for information technology projects that were prepared by the Beneficiary." 
However, the documents appear to be Microsoft PowerPoint presentations, containing summarized 
information that limits our ability to understand the work performed in order to create them, which 
again raises questions about the substantive nature of the proffered position. Furthermore, the only 
"work product" document bearing the Beneficiary's name appears to indicate that IBM copyrighted 
the document in 2014, raising questions regarding the extent of the Beneficiary's involvement in 
creating the document and the extent to which it reflects the work the Beneficiary would perform in 
the position. 
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 
2 A petitioner submits the LCA to the Department of Labor 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 duties, experience, and qualifications. Section 212(n)(l) of the Act; 20 C.F.R. 
§ 655.73l(a). 
3 While DOL is the agency that certifies LCA applications before they are submitted to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (USCIS), DOL regulations note that the Department of Homeland Security (i.e., its immigration benefits branch, 
USCIS) is the department responsible for determining whether the content of an LCA filed for a particular F01m 1-129 
actually supports that petition. See 20 C.F.R. § 655.705(b). 
2 
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