sustained H-1B Case: Software Engineering
Decision Summary
The director denied the petition, finding the proffered software engineer role was not a specialty occupation. The AAO sustained the appeal, determining that the petitioner successfully established the fourth criterion for a specialty occupation: the specific duties were so specialized and complex that the knowledge required is usually associated with a bachelor's degree in computer science or software engineering.
Criteria Discussed
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
20 Mass Ave., N.W., Rm. A3042
iVas11ingtor1, UC 20529
U. S. Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
FILE: Date: <-' ./.A , -' j; < lJF3
n4 RE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
PETITION: Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Pursuant to Section I0 1 (a)(] S)(H)(i)(b) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. ยง I lOl(a)(I S)(H)(i)(b)
ON BEHALF OF PETI'SIONER:
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. Ail documents have been returncd to
the office that originally decided your casc. Any further inquiry must be made to that office.
Robert P. Wiemann, Director
Administrative Appeals Office
LIN 04 089 52 188
Pagc 2
DISCUSSION: The director of the service center denied the nonimmigrant visa petition and the matter is now
before thc Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeai. he appeal will be sustained. 'The petition will be
approved.
The petitioner is a software developer that seeks to employ the beneficiary as a software engineer. The
petitioner, therefore, endeavors to classify the beneficiary as a nonirnmigrant worker in a specialty occupation
pursuant to section lOl(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C:.
Q 1 I0 l(a)(lS)(H)(i)(b).
The director denied the petition because the proffered position is not a specialty occupation. On appeal,
counsel submits a brief and additional and previously submitted evidence.
Section 2!4(i)(l) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. tj 1184(i)(l), defines the term "specialty occupation" as an occupation
that rcquires:
(A) theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and
(B) attainment of a bachelor's or hlgher degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent)
as a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States.
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 4 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A), to qualify as a specialty oecupa.iion, the position must meet one of the
following criteria:
(lj A baccalaureate or higher degree or iis equivalent is nom~ally the minimum requirement
for entry into the particular position;
(2) The degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar
orgznizations or, in the alternative, an employer may show that its pamcular position is
so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with a degree:
(3) The emp!oyer normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the positior,: or
('4) The nature of thc specific duties is so specializcd and complex that knowledge rcquireci
to perform thc duties is usually associated with the attainment of a baccaiaureatc or
higher degree.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) interprets the term "degree" in the criteria at 8 C.F.R.
Q; 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) to mean not just any baccalaureate or higher degree, but one in a specific specialty that is
directly related to the proffered position.
The record of proceed~ng before the AAO contains: (1) Form 1-129 and supporting documentation; (2) the
director's request for add~iional evidence: (3) the petitioner's response to the director's request; (4) the
LIN 04 089 52188
Page 3
director's denial letter; and (5) Form I-290B and supporting documentation. The AAO reviewed the record in
its entirety before issuing its decision.
The petitioner is seeking the beneficiary's services as a software engineer. Evidence of the beneficiary's
duties includes: the Form 1-129; the attachments accompanying the Form 1-129; the company support letter;
and the petitioner's responsc to the director's request for evidence. According to this evidence, the
beneficiary would perform duties that entail designing software programs using techniques of computer
scicnce, engineering, scientific analysis, and mathematical models; designing, debugging, and implementing
in C using Linux platform for ~eer~~~"; designing, developing, and maintaining Linux Kemel based core
products; and evaluaiing new technology and assisting in the architecture and design of follow-on
enhancements and products. The petitioner requires a bachelor's degrcc in computer science, engineering, or
a rclated technical field.
The direclor determined that the proposed position is not a specialty occupation. The director stated that the
petitioner failed to establish that it had H-1B level work for the bencficiay at its Colorado facility, as it had
submitted no active contracts, statements of work, purchase orders, or related documentation that would show
client requcsts for individual software applications, consulting, training, or technical support services in
response to the rcquest for evidence. According to the director, the evidence was insilfficicnt to establish that
the proposed position was not a computer programmer or computer support specialist, which are occupations
that the Department of Labor's ~ccu~attonal Outlook Handbook (the Handbook) indicates do not require a
bacheior's degree. The director determined that the record failed to establish that the petitioner had sufficient
work for its five employees.
On appeal, counsel states that the petitioner is a wholly owned subsidiary o Counscl states
that in response to the request for evidence the petitioner submitted a
t
the Seneliciary, and a consolidate x rctum. Counsel asserts that the pet~tloner is financially
v~able based on the parent comp that the beneficiary is an employee of the petitioner; that
the beneficmy will continue to w~ll work on the ~eer~~~ platform and will work on other software
programs; and that the concept of speculative employment is not in the Act or regulations.
-.
Upon review of the record, the petitioner has established that the proposed position is a specialty occupation.
Thc petitioner has established the fourth criterion at 8 C.F.R. 5 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A): that the nature of the
specific duties is so specialized and complex that the knowledge required to perform them is usually
associated with the iattainrnerit of a baccalaureate or higher degree. As described by the petitioner, the
proposed duties are so specialized and complex as to rcquire the knowledge associated with a bachelor's
degree in compuier science or software engineering. Furthermore, counsel on appeal explains that the
beneficiary will work on the ~eer~~'''~ platform and other in-house software projects; thus, the petitioner has
H-IB level projects to engage the beneficiary's services as a software engineer.
The record establishes !ha: the beneficiary is qualified for the proposcd position as he ho!ds a master's degree in
computer science from Clemson University, South Carolina.
LlN 04 089 52188
Page 4
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1361.
The petitioner has sustained that burden.
OmER: The appeal is sustained. The petition is approved. 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.