sustained H-1B Case: Computer Information Systems

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042 
Washington, DC 20529 
FILE: WAC 04 076 52883 Office: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER Date: flAR 2 iui(t 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary 
PETITION: 
 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1 lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
WAC 04 076 52883 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The service center director denied the nonirnrnigrant visa petition and the matter is now before 
the Administrative Appeals Ofice (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be sustained. 
The petitioner is a research corporation that seeks to employ the beneficiary as a methods and procedures 
analyst. The petitioner endeavors to classify the beneficiary as a nonimrnigrant worker in a specialty occupation 
pursuant to lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1 lOl(a)( 15)(H)(i)(b). 
The director denied the petition because the proffered position is not a specialty occupation and the 
beneficiary is not qualified to perform a specialty occupation. The director found further that the beneficiary 
had failed to maintain his nonimmigrant status and, therefore, is ineligible for an extension of stay. On appeal, 
counsel submits a brief and additional evidence including expert opinions. 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 
 214.1(~)(5), there is no provision for an appeal from the denial of an application for 
extension of stay filed on Form-1-129 or 1-539. As this office does not have jurisdiction over the portion of the 
director's decision regarding the beneficiary's request for an extension of stay, this issue will not be reviewed. 
Section 214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
 1184(i)(l), defines the term "specialty occupation" as an occupation 
that requires: 
(A) 
 theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and 
(B) 
 attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent) 
as a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States. 
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 
 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty occupation, the position must meet one of 
the following criteria: 
(I) 
 A baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum requirement 
for entry into the particular position; 
(2) 
 The degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar 
organizations or, in the alternative, an employer may show that its particular position is 
so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with a degree; 
(3) 
 The employer normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the position; or 
(4) 
 The nature of the specific duties is so specialized and complex that knowledge required to 
perform the duties is usually associated with the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher 
degree. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) interprets the term "degree" in the criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to mean not just any baccalaureate or higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is 
directly related to the proffered position. 
WAC 04 076 52883 
Page 3 
The record of proceeding before the AAO contains: (1) Form 1-129 and supporting documentation; (2) the 
director's request for additional evidence; (3) the petitioner's response to the director's request; (4) the 
director's denial letter; and (5) Form I-290B and supporting documentation. The AAO reviewed the record in 
its entirety before issuing its decision. 
The petitioner is seeking the beneficiary's services as a methods and procedures analyst. Evidence of the 
beneficiary's duties includes: the 1-129 petition; the petitioner's December 23, 2003 letter in support of the 
petition; and the petitioner's response to the director's request for evidence. According to this evidence, the 
beneficiary would perform duties that entail: designing, evaluating, and managing the petitioner's structures, 
administrative policies, information retrieval, and IT infrastructure; analyzing business systems and operating 
procedures and assisting in the design, installation, adaptation, or interfacing of computer and information 
systems technology; planning and organizing studies of work and company problems; installing and 
modifying new information systems technology; conferring with and training personnel; and assisting in areas 
related to "information retrieval and processing, distributed information architectures, and intelligent agents." 
The petitioner indicated that the beneficiary was a qualified candidate for the job because he possesses a 
bachelor's degree in business administration with an option in computer information systems. 
The director found that the proffered position was not a specialty occupation because the petitioner had not 
established the proffered position was that of a management analyst. The director found further that the 
petitioner failed to establish any of the criteria found at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). 
On appeal, counsel submits an expert opinion, whose writer states, in part, that the proffered position is that of 
a methods and procedures analyst in the field of computer information systems, a position that qualifies as a 
specialty occupation. 
Upon review of the entire record, the AAO finds that the totality of the evidence (including the combination of 
the information about the proposed duties, the concrete evidence relating to the petitioner's particular business, the 
comments of the assistant professor and the human resources specialist, and the beneficiary's college diploma and 
transcript) establishes that performance of the proffered position is usually associated with at least a bachelor's 
degree level of knowledge in a specific specialty such as is evidenced by the beneficiary's bachelor of business 
administration degree with an option in computer information systems. Accordingly, the petitioner has satisfied 
the specialty occupation criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4) above, and the beneficiary is qualified to 
serve in the specialty occupation in accordance with 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C)(l) by possessing a U.S. 
bachelor's degree in a specialty required by the specialty occupation here. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
5 1361. The petitioner has sustained that burden. Accordingly, the appeal will be sustained and the petition 
will be approved. 
As earlier stated, however, the director's denial on the basis of the beneficiary's not being in status at the time 
the petition was filed is not subject to appeal and, therefore, still stands. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is sustained. The director's order is withdrawn and the petition is approved.