sustained H-1B Case: Financial Services

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 9717853 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : OCT . 2, 2020 
The Petitioner, a financial services provider, seeks to employ the Beneficiary temporarily under the 
H-lB nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the 
Act) section 10l(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. § l 10l(a)(l5)(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 Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, 
concluding that the record did not establish that the proffered position qualified as a specialty 
occupation . The matter is now before us on appeal. 
Ultimately, the Petitioner has demonstrated eligibility for this classification by a preponderance of the 
evidence. The Petitioner devised a position comprised of responsibilities falling under multiple 
standard occupational classificational codes. In particular, the Securities and Commodities Traders 
and the Operations Research Analysts occupations. The manner in which the Petitioner blended the 
responsibilities of these particular occupational categories leads us to conclude that this role of mixed 
responsibilities is sufficiently complex and unique . The Petitioner properly calculated the prevailing 
wage rate to accommodate the complexities of the position, then compensated the Beneficiary at a 
much higher salary than the wage rate demanded . 
As it relates to the Petitioner's degree requirements, it described the nexus between the stated 
disciplines and the position's duties. Focusing primarily on financial engineering, the Petitioner 
discussed how the candidate would use mathematical techniques to make better decisions and to solve 
financial problems. 
Considering the aggregate of the evidence within the present record, it appears that the full spectrum 
of the duties exceeds those of neophyte-level positions and we are sufficiently persuaded to conclude 
in the Petitioner's favor in the present case. As a result, the Petitioner has demonstrated that it is more 
likely than not, that this particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by 
an individual with a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)(2). The Petitioner has also established that the position satisfies the statutory 
definition of a specialty occupation found within section 214(i)(l) of the Act. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
2