remanded H-1B Case: Information Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8908787 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JULY 28, 2020 
The Petitioner, an information technology solutions and consulting services company, seeks to 
temporarily employ the Beneficiary 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 know ledge; 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 proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. While this appeal was 
pending, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a decision in Itserve Alliance, Inc. 
v. Cissna, --- F.Supp.3d ---, 2020 WL 1150186 (D.D.C. 2020). Subsequently, U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) rescinded previously issued policy guidance and directed its officers 
to apply the existing regulatory definition at 8 C.F.R. § 214 .2(h)(4)(ii) to assess whether a petitioner 
and a beneficiary have an employer-employee relationship. USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-
0114, Rescission of Policy Memoranda at 2 (June 17, 2020), http://www.uscis.gov /legal­
resources /policy-memoranda. 
Because this case is affected by the new policy guidance, we find it appropriate to remand the matter 
for the Director to consider the question anew and to adjudicate in the first instance any additional 
issues as may be necessary and appropriate. 1 Accordingly, the following order shall be issued. 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for further 
proceedings consistent with the foregoing analysis and entry of a new decision . 
1 We observe that the end-client has provided inconsistent information regarding the minimum requirements for the 
proffered position . For instance, in its letter from March 2019, the end-client states that the position required a bachelor's 
degree in computer science, information systems, or a related field of study. However , in its letter from November 2019, 
the end-client asserts that the position requires a bachelor 's degree in computer science, engineering, or a related field.