sustained H-1B

sustained H-1B Case: Manufacturing Engineering

📅 Date unknown 👤 Company 📂 Manufacturing Engineering

Decision Summary

The Director initially denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner failed to establish that the proffered position of 'Engineer I - Manufacturing' qualified as a specialty occupation. Upon de novo review, the AAO found that the Petitioner did successfully establish that the position qualifies as a specialty occupation and that the Beneficiary was qualified for the role, resulting in the appeal being sustained.

Criteria Discussed

Specialty Occupation

View Full Decision Text

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8229597 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-IB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : FEB. 26, 2020 
The Petitioner, a global automotive supplier specializing in I !technology as well 
asl !technology , seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as an "Engineer 
I - Manufacturing" under the H-1 B nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 10l(a)(15)(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 California Service Center denied the petition , concluding that the Petitioner failed 
to establish that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. On appeal , the Petitioner submits 
additional evidence and contends that the petition should be approved. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. We 
follow the preponderance of the evidence standard as specified in Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 
369, 375-76 (AAO 2010) . Upon de novo review , we conclude that the Petitioner has established that 
the proffered position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation as defined by section 
214(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1184(i)(l) , and 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). Further, the record also 
establishes that the Beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of the proffered position. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained .

Using this case in a petition? Let MeritDraft draft the argument →

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.