sustained H-1B Case: Software Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 10907564 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: SEPT. 03, 2020 
The Petitioner, a global computing products and services company, seeks to temporarily employ the 
Beneficiary as a "Senior Principal Software Engineer-IT" 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 Petitioner did 
not establish that the Beneficiary is qualified for the proffered position. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit by a 
preponderance of the evidence.1 We review the questions in this matter de nova. 2 Upon de nova 
review, we will sustain the appeal. 
Based upon our review of the record, we find the Petitioner has overcome the basis for the Director's 
denial. In this matter, the record demonstrates that the proffered position is a specialty occupation 
under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii) and (iii)(A) . Our review of the Beneficiary's academic credentials, 
the credential evaluation, the duty descriptions for the position, and the requirements necessary to 
perform those duties establishes that the Beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of the proffered 
position. The Petitioner has established that the Beneficiary's foreign degree is equivalent to a U.S. 
bachelor's degree, and the degree is in a related field required by the occupation. The totality of the 
record establishes, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the Beneficiary is academically qualified 
to perform the duties of the specialty occupation under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C)(2). 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
1 Section 291 of the Act; Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). 
2 See Matter of Chri sta's Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015).