sustained H-1B Case: Specialty Occupation

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 21686893 
Appeal of California Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (H-1B) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAY 10, 2022 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary under the H-1B nonimmigrant 
classification for specialty occupations. See 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-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 of the California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. We initially rejected the 
Petitioner 's appeal for untimely filing. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed a combined motion to the 
Director, requesting to reopen and reconsider the Director's decision to deny the petition. The Director 
dismissed the combined motion. Unrelated to the motion filed to the Director, we reopened the 
Petitioner's appeal under 8 C.F.R. §103.5(a)(5).1 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit by a 
preponderance of the evidence. Section 291 of the Act; Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375 
(AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter de nova. See Matter of Christo 's Inc., 26 l&N 
Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de nova review, we will sustain the appeal. 
In this matter, the record demonstrates that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. We 
conclude that the nature of the specific duties is so specialized and complex that more likely than not 
the knowledge required to perform them is usually associated with the attainment of a bachelor's or 
higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. Specifically, the Petitioner has sufficiently 
articulated the scope of its business operations and explained why the Beneficiary 's duties are 
specialized and complex. The Petitioner has also established that the duties require specialized 
knowledge usually associated with a bachelor's or higher degree directly related to the position. 
1 By filing an appeal, the Petitioner placed the proceeding under the jurisdiction of our office pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.3(a)(l)(iv). Although we initially rejected the appeal, we reopened it on a service motion. Since we have appellate 
authority over the service centers and we reopened the proceedings, our decision supersedes the Director's decision on the 
combined motion. 
Therefore, the record satisfies the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(4). Further, 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). 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
2