sustained H-1B Case: Software Development

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 12458488 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : DEC . 18, 2020 
The Petitioner, a company engaged in network security solutions, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a software development principal engineer under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification 
for specialty occupations. Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 
8 U.S.C. § 1101(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 did not 
establish that the Beneficiary is qualified for the proffered position. The matter is now before us on 
appeal. On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief and asserts that the Director erred in denying the 
petition . The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the 
evidence. Section 291 of the Act; Matter ofChawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). We review 
the questions in this matter de novo. See Matter of Christo 's Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 
2015). Upon de novo 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 find that the Petitioner has overcome the basis 
of the Director's denial. Our review of the Beneficiary's academic credentials, the opinions regarding 
the minimum educational requirements for the proffered position, as well as evidence of the 
relationship between the duties and the Beneficiary's academic degree establish that the totality of the 
evidence establishes that the Beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of the proffered position. 
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). 
We also find that the duties of the proffered position are so specialized and complex that the knowledge 
required to perform them is usually associated with at least a U.S. bachelor's degree in a specific 
specialty, or the 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. 
2