sustained H-1B Case: Business Analysis

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 10694325 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JULY 29, 2020 
The Petitioner, a media streaming company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as a payment 
platform analyst under the H-1 B nonirnmigrant 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 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 had 
not established ( a) the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation, and (b) the labor condition 
application (LCA) identifies all approved petitions for the LCA. On appeal, the Petitioner submits a 
brief and asserts that the Director erred. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit by a 
preponderance of the evidence. 1 We review the questions in this matter de novo.2 Upon de nova 
review, we will sustain the appeal. 
We conclude the Petitioner has overcome the bases of the Director's denial. In this matter, the record 
establishes more likely than not that the nature of the specific duties is specialized and complex and 
the knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with the attainment of a bachelor's or 
higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, as required by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)( 4). Specifically, the Petitioner has explained why these job duties are specialized 
and complex. In addition, the Petitioner established that the duties require specialized knowledge 
usually associated with a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. The 
record of proceeding in this particular case establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the 
knowledge associated with the proposed duties constitutes a "body of highly specialized knowledge" 
such that attainment of one of the specified degrees would constitute a degree "in the specific 
specialty" as contemplated by section 214(i)(l) of the Act. Further, we observe the offered wage is 
commensurate with a specialty occupation position. 
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 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). 
Additionally, based upon our review of the entire record of proceedings, we conclude that the 
Petitioner identified all previously approved petitions for the LCA. The Petitioner has provided 
beneficiary names and file numbers of each petition linked to the submitted LCA. Further, the 
Petitioner has indicated all of these petitions associated with this LCA have been denied, which is 
consistent with USCIS records. As such, the Petitioner has complied with the requirement at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(i)(B)(3). 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
2