sustained H-1B Case: Unknown

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 8721194 
Appeal of Vermont Service Center Decision 
Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : FEB. 6, 2020 
The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary under the H-IB 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 Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not establish 
that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. Upon de nova review, we will sustain the 
appeal. 
Based upon our review of the entire record of proceedings, we find that the Petitioner has overcome the basis 
of the Director's denial and conclude that the record establishes 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. Specifically, the 
Petitioner has provided a detailed job description and explained why these duties, when performed within 
the context of its specific business operation, are specialized and complex. In addition, the Petitioner 
established that the duties require specialized knowledge usually associated with a bachelor's or higher 
degree in a specific specialty by outlining the educational requirements that consist of a specific range 
of acceptable degrees. Though the Petitioner identified a range of degrees as acceptable for the proffered 
position that on its face may appear broad, the record of proceedings in this particular case establishes by a 
preponderance of the evidence that the knowledge associated with the proposed duties nonetheless 
constitutes a "body of highly specialized knowledge" such that attainment of one of those degrees would still 
constitute a degree "in the specific specialty'' as contemplated by section 214(i)(l) of the Act. See Matter of 
Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). 
Further , our review of the Beneficiary's academic credentials, the opinions regarding the duties, and 
the requirements necessary to perform those duties further establishes that the Beneficiary is qualified 
to perform the duties of the proffered position . Therefore, the record satisfies the criterion at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 214.2(h)( 4)(iii)(A)( 4). Finally, 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) , and 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
2