sustained H-1B Case: Software Development

MATTER OF V- CORP. 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: APR. 29,2016 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, an entertainment software developer, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary 
under the H -1 B nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act)§ 101(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b). The H-1B 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, California Service Center, denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
Petitioner had not established that the proffered position qualifies for treatment as a specialty 
occupation and had not demonstrated that the Beneficiary is qualified to work in a specialty 
occupation position. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. In its appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and 
asserts that the evidence in the record is sufficient to show that the visa petition should be approved. 
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 
bases of the Director's denial. As the totality of the evidence presented in this particular record of 
proceedings establishes ( 1) the specialty occupation nature of the particular position for which this 
petition was filed, and (2) the Beneficiary's qualification to serve in that specialty occupation. 
In visa petition proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration 
benefit sought. Section 291 ofthe Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter ofOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 
(BIA 2013). Here, that burden has been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as Matter ofV- Corp., ID# 16978 (AAO Apr. 29, 2016)