sustained H-1B Case: Healthcare

(b)(6)
DATE: 
IN RE: 
FEB 0 9 2015 
Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
OFFICE: CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER 
U.S. Depa.-tment of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and lmrnigration Service: 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washirw.ton. DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: 
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. This is a non­
precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish agency policy 
through non-precedent decisions. 
Thank you, 
I;Zd�:z 
il't/ Ron Rosenberg 
Chief, Administrat e Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, California Service Center, denied the nonimmigrant visa petition. 
The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. Upon review, the 
decision of the director will be withdrawn. The petition will be approved. 
The petitioner seeks to classify the beneficiary as a nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation 
pursuant to section 101 (a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b ). The director denied the petition, concluding that the evidence of record had 
not satisfied the statutory and regulatory requirements for establishing a position as an H-1B 
specialty occupation. 
Based upon our review, we have determined that the evidence of record, as now expanded by the 
submissions on appeal, have overcome the director's grounds for denying the petition. Those 
submissions include decisive documentary evidence that the relevant State Department of Health 
has issued the beneficiary the license required for lawful practice of the specialty in question. 
Those submissions also include a copy of the beneficiary's license to practice in the pertinent State, 
which was issued on August 28, 2014 - one day before the director's decision.1 
The regulation at 8 C.P.R. § 214.2 (h)(4)(v)(A) states that where a state or local license is required 
for an individual to fully perform the duties of a particular specialty, the alien "must have that 
license prior to approval of the petition to be found qualified to enter the United States and 
immediately engage in employment in the occupation." That requirement applies here and has been 
met. 
We specifically find (1) that the particular position that is the subject of this petition is one for 
which the law of the pertinent State requires a license in the specific specialty which the beneficiary 
would practice; (2) that, where, as here, foreign degrees are involved, the State will license only 
persons whose foreign degrees are firmly established as equivalent to at least a U.S. bachelor's 
degree in the specific specialty, under several stringent confirmatory criteria specified in the State's 
regulations; (3) that the beneficiary has been issued the requisite license; and ( 4) that the evidence 
of record establishes that the beneficiary does indeed hold the required educational credentials, 
which have been established in the record as equivalent to at least a U.S. bachelor's degree in the 
specific specialty in which the beneficiary would serve. Thus, we conclude that the petitioner has 
established both the proffered position as a specialty occupation and also the beneficiary as 
qualified to fully perform the services of that position. 
For the reasons stated above, the director's decision to deny the petition is withdrawn, the appeal 
will be sustained, and the petition will be approved. 
1 It is noted that, while the regulatory provision at 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b )(1) generally requires that eligibility 
be established "at the time of filing," 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(v)(A) provides an exception for the H-lB 
licensing requirement that permits petitioners to establish a beneficiary's licensing eligibility "prior to 
approval" of a petition. As the petitioner provided evidence of licensure prior to final agency action on the 
petition, it has satisfied the requirements of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(v)(A). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 3 
In visa petition proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration 
benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter of Otiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 
(BIA 2013). Here, that burden has been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained.