sustained H-1B Case: Software Development

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 10021152 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : JUNE 8, 2020 
The Petitioner, an online consumer goods and retail business, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a "Software Development Engineer II" 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 California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. 
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 I&N Dec . 369, 375 (AAO 2010) . 
Upon de nova 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) . The Petitioner has provided a detailed job description 
and established that these duties, when performed within the context of its specific business operations, 
are 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 the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). Further , the record establishes that the 
Beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of the proffered position under section 2 l 4(i)(2) of the 
Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C)(2). 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained .