sustained
H-1B
sustained H-1B Case: Motion Control Technologies
Decision Summary
The Director initially denied the petition, concluding the beneficiary was not qualified for the position. The AAO sustained the appeal upon de novo review, finding that the totality of the record, including academic credentials and an expert opinion, established by a preponderance of the evidence that the beneficiary's degree is directly related to the position and he is qualified to perform the duties of the specialty occupation.
Criteria Discussed
Beneficiary Qualifications Specialty Occupation
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 In Re : 9048387 Appeal of California Service Center Decision Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office Date : WL Y 2, 2020 The Petitioner, a manufacturer of motion control technologies and systems, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations . See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C . § l 10l(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 record does not establish that the Beneficiary is qualified for the proffered position. The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence . Section 291 of the Act; Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter de nova. See Matter of Christo 's Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537,537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de nova review, we will sustain the appeal. Based upon our review of the entire record of proceedings, including the Beneficiary's academic credentials, the expert opinion letter, and the submissions on appeal, we conclude that the Beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of the proffered position. The totality of the record establishes, by a preponderance of the evidence , that the Beneficiary's degree is directly related to the proffered position and that he is academically qualified to perform the duties of the specialty occupation. As a result, the Petitioner has satisfied the requirements under section 214(i)(2) of the Act and 8 C.F.R . § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C). Further, 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). ORDER: The appeal is sustained.
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.