sustained
H-1B
sustained H-1B Case: Engineering
Decision Summary
The appeal was sustained because the AAO, upon de novo review, concluded that the beneficiary was qualified for the proffered position. It found the beneficiary's degrees in related engineering fields were directly related to the job duties. The AAO also found that the position itself qualified as a specialty occupation.
Criteria Discussed
Beneficiary Qualifications Under 8 C.F.R. ยง 214.2(H)(4)(Iii)(C) Specialty Occupation Position Under 8 C.F.R. ยง 214.2(H)(4)(Iii)(A)(4)
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services MATTER OF N-, INC. Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office DATE: SEPT. 16, 2019 APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION PETITION: FORM 1-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER The Petitioner, an .__ __________ ___ ----d company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations . Immigration and Nationality Act section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. ยง 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 Director of the California Service Center denied the petition , concluding that the Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary is qualified for the proffered position . Upon de novo review, we will sustain the appeal. Based upon our review of the entire record of proceedings, including the submissions on appeal addressing the grounds for the Director's decision , we find that the Petitioner has overcome the basis of the Director's denial. We considered the U.S . Department of Labor's Occupational Outlook Handbook and the Beneficiary's academic credentials, and conclude that the Beneficiary is qualified for the position . Specifically , we conclude that the Beneficiary's degrees are in "related engineering fields" directly related to the duties of the proffered position, and the Beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of the proffered position . As a result, the Petitioner has satisfied the requirements under section 214(i)(2) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. ยง 1184(i)(2), and 8 C.F.R. ยง 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C). Though not addressed by the Director, we also find that the duties of the proffered position are so specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with at least a U.S. bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or the equivalent, as required by 8 C.F.R. ยง 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). Further , we conclude that Petitioner has established, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the particular position being offered to the Beneficiary 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. ยง 214.2(h)( 4)(ii). Matter of N-, Inc. ORDER: The appeal is sustained. Cite as Matter ofN-, Inc., ID# 4686129 (AAO Sept. 16, 2019) 2
Use this winning precedent in your petition
MeritDraft analyzes sustained AAO decisions like this one to generate petition arguments that mirror what actually gets approved.
Build Your Winning Petition →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.