sustained H-1B Case: Computer Science

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: OCT. 04, 2023 In Re: 28510948 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification 
for specialty occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 10l(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b), 
8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b). The H-IB 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 Vermont Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. The matter is now before us 
on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter ofChawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will sustain the appeal. 
The record in its entirety credibly reflects that the Petitioner's applied scientist II position requires an 
incumbent to design, develop, evaluate, deploy, update models, and analyze solutions for machine 
learning and natural language applications. The record contains credible documentation describing 
the specific duties the applied scientist II will perform, for example developing and/or applying 
statistical modeling techniques such as Bayesian models and deep neural networks. The evidence the 
Petitioner submitted established that the Petitioner's range of degree fields inclusive of physics 
comprised a specialty based in the knowledge required to perfonn the duties of the proffered specialty 
occupation. Specifically, the evidence in the record indicated that the numerical principles and 
algorithmic modeling underpinning the field of physics was sufficiently shared amongst the field of 
computer science, computer and electronic engineering, and mathematics such that the fields are 
appropriately related to one another to comprise a specialty required to perform the duties of the 
proffered job. Consequently, we observe the record as sufficient to support that assertion by a 
preponderance of the evidence. When reviewed within the context of the Petitioner 's business 
operations, we find the evidence ofrecord sufficient to demonstrate that this Beneficiary's work would 
in fact involve a "body of highly specialized knowledge" attained through a precise and specific course 
of study that relates directly and closely to the proffered position. 
The evidence of record therefore establishes that the proffered position requires the theoretical and 
practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and the attainment of a bachelor's or 
higher degree in the specific specialty or its equivalent. It qualifies for classification as a specialty 
occupation as the term is defined at section 214(i)(l) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). It also 
establishes that the position is so complex or unique that it can only be performed by an individual 
with a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or the equivalent, and it therefore also satisfies 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). The record demonstrates that the Beneficiary possesses the education in a 
field related to computer science, computer or electrical engineering, math, or physics which provided 
them the theoretical and practical body of knowledge required to perform the duties of this specialty 
occupation. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
2