sustained H-1B Case: Unknown

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 8772859 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form 1-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (H-lB) 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : WL Y 7, 2020 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary 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. § 110l(a)(l5)(H)(i)(b) . 
The Vermont Service Center Director denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner had not 
established that the proffered position is a specialty occupation . On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that 
the Director erred and the Petitioner has established eligibility for this benefit. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit by a 
preponderance of the evidence.' We review the questions in this matter de novo.2 Upon de nova 
review, we will sustain the appeal. 
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). Specifically , we conclude that the nature of the specific duties 
is so specialized and complex that 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, as required by 
8 C.F .R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A)( 4). The Petitioner provided a sufficiently detailed description and 
explained the Beneficiary's proposed work. The supporting documentation establishes that the duties 
of the position required a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific discipline, or its equivalent. The 
proposed duties , when reviewed within the context of the Petitioner 's business operations, are 
sufficient to demonstrate that the duties of the position require a "body of highly specialized 
knowledge" attained through a precise and specific course of study that relates directly and closely to 
the proffered position . 
The totality of the record establishes that, more likely than not, the proffered position requires the 
theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and the attainment of a 
bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty or its equivalent. The Petitioner has established that 
the proffered position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation as defmed by section 214(i)(l) of 
the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1184(i)(l), 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii), and (iii)(A)(4). Additionally, the record 
1 Section 291 of the Act; Matter ofCha wathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 2010). 
2 See Matter of Christo 's Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015) . 
establishes that the Beneficiary is qualified to perform the duties of the proffered position by holding 
a qualifying degree from an accredited college or university in the United States. Section 214(i)(2) of 
the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(C)(l). 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
2