sustained H-1B Case: Architecture

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
InRe : 8768518 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: APR. 27, 2020 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as an "intern architect" 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 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 Vermont Service Center Director denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner had not 
established that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that 
the Director erred and it has established eligibility for this benefit. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit by a 
preponderance of the evidence.' The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) reviews the questions in 
this matter de nova. 2 Upon de nova review, we will sustain the appeal. 
In this matter, the record demonstrates that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. The totality 
of the record shows that this particular position is not within the category of an architect, but rather 
must be reviewed as an unlicensed architect in training. Both occupations require a bachelor's degree 
in architecture in order to enter the occupation . 3 As explained by the Petitioner and supported by the 
legal requirements regarding the use of the term of "architect," the Petitioner submitted a certified 
labor condition application (LCA) for an occupation similar to the occupation of architect. We 
conclude that the evidence ofrecord regarding this unique position in the Petitioner's state location is 
sufficient to demonstrate that, more likely than not, the certified LCA supports the position described 
1 Section 291 of the Act; Matter ofCha wathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). 
2 See Matter of Christo 's Inc ., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). 
3 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook , Architects, 
https://www.bls.gov/ooh/architecture-and-engineering /architects.htm (last visited Apr. 23, 2020). 
in the petition. While we have some concern regarding the wage level for the proffered position, we 
conclude that, more likely than not, the wage is commensurate with this specific specialty occupation. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
2