remanded H-1B Case: Shipping And Warehousing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 16729800 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : APR. 16, 2021 
The Petitioner, a shipping and warehousing company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a 
"market research analyst" 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 Director of the California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record does not 
establish that the Beneficiary is qualified for 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. 2 
We express no opinion regarding the ultimate resolution of this case on remand and the Director may 
request any additional evidence considered pertinent to the new determination and any other issue. 
Accordingly, the matter will be remanded to the Director to consider the specialty-occupation issue 
and enter a new decision. 3 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn.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 See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 10l(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. § l 10l(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b). 
2 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] ."). 
3 We note here that while the appeal was pending, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a decision in 
Innova Sols., Inc. v. Baran, 983 F.3d 428 (9th Cir. 2020), which may impact the specialty occupation issue.