remanded H-1B Case: Information Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 17868527 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 4, 2021 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as an "information technology specialist" 
under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. 1 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 California Service Center Director denied the petition, concluding that the record did not establish 
that the Beneficiary is qualified to perform services in the specialty occupation . On appeal , the 
Petitioner submits a brief and asserts that the Director erred by denying the petition. The matter is 
now before us on appeal. 
In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit by a 
preponderance of the evidence. 2 The Administrative Appeals Office reviews the questions in this 
matter de novo3 but a threshold matter must be resolved before we may address the merits of the 
Director's decision and the Petitioner's appeal. Accordingly, the matter will be remanded to the 
Director for further review of the record and a new decision. 
I. ANALYSIS 
In the letter submitted in support of the Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, the Petitioner 
provided a short and general description of the proffered position. On the labor condition application 
(LCA) 4 submitted in support of the H-lB petition, the Petitioner designated the proffered position 
under the occupational category "Computer User Support Specialists" corresponding to the standard 
1 See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) , 8 U.S.C. § 110l(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). 
2 Section 291 of the Act; Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). 
3 See Matter of Christo 's Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). 
4 The Petitioner is required to submit a certified LCA to demonstrate that it will pay an H-1B 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 perform ing the same services. Section 212(n)(l) 
of the Act; 20 C.F.R. § 655.73l(a) . 
occupational classification (SOC) code 15-11515 from the Occupational Information Network 
(O*NET) at a Level I wage. The O*NET identifies this occupational category as a Job Zone Three 
occupation, indicating that most occupations in the zone require training in vocational schools, related 
on-the-job experience, or an associate's degree. Thus, designation of this occupation on the LCA 
strongly suggests that the proffered position would not be a specialty occupation. Additionally, the 
description is not sufficiently detailed to ascertain the nature and level of responsibility of the proposed 
position, including whether the duties as generally described correspond to the occupation designated 
on the LCA. The record does not establish the substantive nature of the proffered position or 
demonstrate that performing the duties described would require the theoretical and practical 
application of a body of highly specialized knowledge and the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher 
degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, as the minimum for entry into the occupation. 6 
Accordingly, the record does not include sufficient evidence to establish that the proffered position is 
a specialty occupation as defined in the statute and regulations; and a beneficiary's credentials to 
perform a particular job are relevant only when the job is found to be a specialty occupation. Thus, 
until the record includes sufficient evidence to establish the proposed position is a specialty 
occupation, an analysis of the Beneficiary's qualifications in this matter is premature. Although there 
are deficiencies in the information regarding the Beneficiary's qualifications, it is not possible to 
conclude that the Beneficiary is unqualified to perform the non-H-1 B caliber position described in the 
current record. 
II. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner was not previously accorded the opportunity to address the deficiencies in the record 
discussed above, we will remand the record for further review of these issues. The Director may 
request any additional evidence considered pertinent to the new determination. 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for the entry of a 
new decision consistent with the foregoing analysis. 
5 The O*NET recently updated its occupational classifications. The "Computer User Support Specialist" occupation is 
now identified as SOC code 15-1232. See Summary Report for: 15-1151 - Computer User Support Specialist, O*NET 
OnLine Archives (Nov. 17, 2020), https://www.onetonline.org/Archive_ONET­
SOC_201 O _Taxonomy_ 09 _ 2020/link/summary/15-1151/. 
6 See section 214(i)(l) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) (defining the term "specialty occupation). 
2