remanded H-1B Case: Research Analysis

MATTER OF N-T-, INC. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: SEPT. 30, 2019 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a recruitment firm, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a "research 
analyst" under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. 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. On appeal, the Petitioner submits 
additional evidence and contends that the petition should be approved. 
The Director 's decision stated at the outset that the only issue to be discussed would be whether or 
not the Petitioner had established that it would engage the Beneficiary in an employer-employee 
relationship. However, after that statement, the decision discussed what appears to be an inquiry 
into whether the proffered position is a specialty occupation. The decision then pivoted back to the 
employer-employee issue, stating that because the Petitioner had not satisfied any of the specialty 
occupation criteria, it had not established that it would engage the Beneficiary in an employer­
employee relationship. It is unclear whether this petition was denied because the offered position is 
not a specialty occupation or because the Petitioner would not engage the Beneficiary in an 
employer-employee relationship, or for both reasons. The Petitioner appears similarly confused. 
A remand is appropriate when the Director does not fully explain the reasons for the denial so that 
the affected party has a fair opportunity to contest the decision and the AAO an opportunity for 
meaningful appellate review. Cf Matter of M-P-, 20 I&N Dec . 786 (BIA 1994) (finding that the 
reasons for denying a motion must be clear to allow the affected party a meaningful opportunity to 
challenge the determination on appeal). The Director's decision will therefore be withdrawn and the 
matter remanded for entry of a new decision. The Director may request any additional evidence 
considered pertinent to the new determination. 
In addition to the issues explored originally, the Director may also wish to consider whether the 
certified labor condition application (LCA) corresponds to and supports the H-lB petition, as we 
question whether the proffered position is actually located within the "Economists" occupational 
Matter of N-T-, Inc. 
category. In particular, we question whether the duties are more similar to those of a position 
located within the "Market Research Analysts" occupational category, or another category. See 
O*NET Summary Report for "Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists," SOC code 13-
1161 at https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/13- l l 6 l.OO (last visited Aug. 28, 2019). 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for farther 
proceedings consistent with the foregoing analysis and for the entry of a new 
decision. 
Cite as Matter ofN-T-, Inc., ID# 4249447 (AAO Sept. 30, 2019) 
2