sustained L-1B Case: Software Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF S-US LLC 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: AUG. 22,2017 
APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER 
The Petitioner, a sports data management company, seeks to temporarily employ the Beneficiary as 
"Software Engineer - Technical Lead" under the L-1 B nonimmigrant classification for 
intracompany transferees. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act)§ 10l(a)(15)(L), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101(a)(15)(L). · The L-IB classification allows a corporation or other legal entity (including its 
affiliate or subsidiary) to transfer a qualifying foreign employee with "specialized knowledge" to 
work temporarily in the United States. 
The Director of the California Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish, as required, that the Beneficiary: (1) possesses specialized knowledge; (2) has been 
employed abroad as a manager or executive, or in a specialized knowledge capacity; and (3) will be 
employed in the United States in a specialized knowledge capacity. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief asserting that the Director erred by focusing on the 
Beneficiary's use of company systems and tools rather than taking into account his role in using 
those tools to create and help develop proprietary products that the company sells to its customers. 
Upon de novo review, we will sustain the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
To establish eligibility for the L-1 nonimmigrant visa classification, the petitioner must meet the 
criteria outlined in section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Act. Specifically, a qualifying organization must 
have employed the beneficiary in a qualifying managerial or executive capacity, or in a specialized 
knowledge capacity, for one continuous year within the three years preceding the beneficiary's 
application for admission into the United States. In addition, the beneficiary must seek to enter the 
United States temporarily to continue rendering his or her services to the same employer or a 
subsidiary or affiliate. 
The statute defines specialized knowledge as a special knowledge of the company product and its 
application in international markets or an advanced level of knowledge of processes and procedures of 
the company. Section 214(c)(2)(B) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1184(c)(2)(B). Our regulations define 
specialized knowledge as: 
.
Matter of S-US LLC 
[S]pecial knowledge possessed by an individual of the petitiOning organization's 
product, service, research, equipment, techniques, management or other interests and its 
application in international markets, or an advanced level of knowledge or expertise in 
the organization's processes and procedures. 
8 C.F.R. § 214.2(l)(l)(ii)(D). 
An individual L-1B petition filed on Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, must include 
evidence that the beneficiary's prior year of employment abroad was in a position that was 
managerial, executive or involved specialized knowledge, evidence that the beneficiary's prior 
education, training and employment qualifies .him or her to perform the intended services in the 
United States, and a detailed description of the '~ervices to be performed in a specialized knowledge 
capacity in the United States. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(1)(3). 
II. DISCUSSION 
The sole issue to be addressed is whether the Petitioner established that the Beneficiary possesses 
specialized knowledge and whether he has been employed abroad, and will be employed in the 
United States, in a specialized knowledge capacity. 
The Petitioner has developed a proprietary platform, called which is an analytics platform 
that is sold to and used by professional sports leagues and sports media outlets. The Petitioner stated 
that the Beneficiary obtained special and advanced knowledge related to during his nearly 
five years of employment with its foreign affiliate, where he worked with legacy software, data 
collection systems, and internal data life cycles that are proprietary to the company and are necessary 
to create its "next generation" data software tools. The Petitioner provided extensive documentation 
regarding its products and pointed to its exclusive data provider agreement with the 
that resulted from the company's development of the platform, which 
will be the focus of the proposed employment in the United States. 
On appeal, the Petitioner acknowledges the Director's finding that the Beneficiary's job duties are 
similar to those of other software developers in the industry, but emphasizes that the Director did not 
take into account the Beneficiary's documented role in contributing to the development of the 
Petitioner's flagship product. The Petitioner also discusses in greater detail how the Beneficiary 
gained his specialized knowledge, and further explains his training and progressive experience, 
including examples of six different projects in which he created new proprietary technology in his 
role as a front end developer. The record shows that during his first two years of employment 
abroad the Beneficiary gained critical knowledge of the company's legacy tools, which served as the 
foundation for his creation and development of new technology and will continue to similarly serve 
him in his work with the platform in his proposed U.S. employment. 
2 
.
Matter of S-US LLC 
In addition, the Petitioner provides an organizational chart, which shows that of the company's II 0 
software engineers, only 12, including the Beneficiary, are distinguished as technical leads, whose 
knowledge of the company's data life cycle and proprietary software is recognized as more highly 
developed and more complex than that found among other software engineers within the same 
organization. The record substantiates the Petitioner's claim that the Beneficia~;y is deemed a design 
and development expert with respect to the ongoing development of the core · platform and 
is not simply familiar with its use, implementation, and support. 
The totality of the evidence establishes that the Beneficiary possesses specialized knowledge, which 
has been, and continues to be, integral to the Beneficiary's employment with the Petitioner and its 
foreign affiliate. The record of proceeding, as supplemented by the Petitioner's submission on 
appeal, now contains sufficient evidence to overcome the basis for the Director's decision. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has established that the Beneficiary possesses specialized knowledge, and that his 
employment both abroad and in the United States requires specialized knowledge. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as Matter of S-US LLC, ID# 488823 (AAO Aug. 22, 2017) 
3