sustained H-1B Case: Management Consulting

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8756715 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: APR. 29, 2020 
The Petitioner, a management consulting company, 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. § 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 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. Upon de nova 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 conclude that the Petitioner has overcome the 
basis of the Director's denial. The Petitioner has provided a detailed job description for the proffered 
position, as well as work samples completed by the Beneficiary and corresponding to the position, and 
explained why these duties, when performed within the context of its specific business operation, are 
specialized and complex. Specifically, we conclude that the nature of the specific duties is so 
specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with the 
attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent, as required by 
8 C.F.R. § 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. § 214 .2(h)(4)(ii) . 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained.