remanded H-1B Case: Staffing And Consulting

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 9501457 
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 : WL Y 6, 2020 
The Petitioner, an international staffing 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. 
§ l 101(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, concluding that the evidence of 
record does not establish that (I) the Petitioner will have an employer-employee relationship with the 
Beneficiary , and (2) the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. Upon de nova review , 
we will remand the matter for the entry of a new decision. 
The Petitioner submits additional evidence on appeal including a new letter from the client. The 
Petitioner asserts that the evidence submitted demonstrates that the proffered position qualifies as a 
specialty occupation and that it will have an employer-employee relationship with the Beneficiary. 
While this appeal was pending, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a decision 
inltserve 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U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) rescinded previously issued policy guidance and 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 and the Director has not yet addressed the 
additional evidence submitted on appeal , we find it appropriate to remand the matter for the Director 
to consider the questions anew and to adjudicate in the first instance any additional issues as may be 
necessary and appropriate . Accordingly, the following order shall be issued. 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for farther 
proceedings consistent with the foregoing analysis and entry of a new decision. 
2