sustained O-1A Case: Engineering

U.S.Departmentof HomelandSecurity
identi U.S.CitizenshipandImmigrationServices
fying data deleted to ogice ofssminisirative sggeais,us 2090
PTBVent Clearly Unwarrante(1 Washington,DC 20529-2090
invasionofpersonalprivacy U.S.Citizenship
and Immigration
GC services
FILE: Office: CALIFORNIASERVICECENTER Date: OCT0 1 2010
IN RE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
PETITION: Petitionfor aNonimmigrantWorkerPursuantto Section101(a)(15)(O)of theImmigration
andNationalityAct, 8 U.S.C.§ 1101(a)(15)(O).
ON BEHALFOFPETITIONER:
INSTRUCTIONS:
Enclosedpleasefind thedecisionof theAdministrativeAppealsOfñeein yourcase.All of thedocuments
relatedtothismatterhavebeenreturnedto theofficethatoriginallydecidedyourcase.Pleasebeadvisedthat
anyfurtherinquirythatyoumighthaveconcerningyourcasemustbemadetothatofñce.
Thankyou,
PerryRhew
Chief,AdministrativeAppealsOfñce
www.uscis.gov
Page2
DISCUSSION: TheDirector,CaliforniaServiceCenter,deniedthenonimmigrantvisapetition.Thematteris
nowbeforetheAdministrativeAppealsOffice(AAO)onappealTheAAOwill withdrawthedirector'sdecision
andsustaintheappeal.
Thepetitionerfiled thispetitionseekingto classifythebeneficiaryasan0-1 nonimmigrantpursuanttosection
101(a)(15)(O)(i)of theImmigrationandNationalityAct (theAct), asanalienof extraordinaryability in the
field of science.The petitioneris engagedin the manufactureof cuttingtools andcoatings.It currently
employsthe beneficiaryasa developmentalresearchengineerpursuantto anapprovedH-lB classification
petitionand now seeksto changehis statusso that he maycontinueto work in this positionfor three
additionalyears.
On July 21,2009,thedirectordeniedthe petitionconcludingthatthepetitionerfailedto establishthatthe
petitionerwill engagethebeneficiary'sservicesfor aspecificeventoreventsasrequiredbytheregulations.
Thepetitionersubsequentlyfiledanappeal.Thedirectordeclinedtotreattheappealasamotionandforwarded
theappealto theAAO. Onappeal,counselassertsthat"[t]heconceptof aneventalludesto aspecificperiodof
timewith specificstartingandendingpoints,"andemphasizesthatthepetitionerhasnotofferedthebeneficiary
open-endedor speculativeemployment.Counselcontendsthatthepetitionerclearlydescribedthebeneficiary's
anticipateddutiesandtheneedfor hisservicesfor theperiodof timerequested.Counselsubmitsa briefand
additionalevidenceinsupportoftheappeal.
L TheLaw
Section101(a)(I5)(O)(i)of theAct,8 U.S.C.§ 1101(a)(15)(O)(i),providesfortheclassificationof aqualified
alienwho:
hasextraordinaryability in thesciences,arts,education,business,orathleticswhichhasbeen
demonstratedby sustainednationalor internationalacclaim. . . andwhoseachievements
havebeenrecognizedin thefield throughextensivedocumentation,andseeksto enterthe
UnitedStatestocontinueworkin theareaof extraordinaryability . . .
Theregulationat8C.F.R.§214.2(o)(3)(ii)defines,in pertinentpart:
Extraordinaryability in thefield of science,education,business,orathleticsmeansa levelof
expertiseindicatingthatthepersonisoneof thesmallpercentagewhohavearisento thevery
topof thefieldofendeavor.
Pursuantto 8 C.F.R.§ 214.2(o)(1)(i),a qualifiedalienmaybeauthorizedto cometo the UnitedStatesto
performservicesrelatingto aneventor eventsif petitionedfor by anemployer.Theregulationat 8 C.F.R.
§214.2(o)(2)(ii)providesthatpetitionsforO aliensshallbeaccompaniedbythefollowing:
Page3
(A) Theevidencespecifiedin theparticularsectionfortheclassification;
(B) Copiesof anywrittencontractsbetweenthepetitionerandthealienbeneficiaryor, if
thereis no written contract,a summaryof the termsof the oral agreementunder
whichthealienwill beemployed;
(C) An explanationof the natureof the eventsor activities,the beginningandending
datesfor the eventsor activities,and a copy of any itineraryfor the eventsor
activities; and
(D) A writtenadvisoryopinion(s)fromtheappropriateconsultingentityorentities.
Theregulationat8C.F.R.§ 214.2(o)(3)(ii)defines"event"asfollows:
Event meansan activity such as, but not limited to, a scientific project,conference,
convention,lectureseries,tour, exhibit, businessproject,academicyear,or engagement.
Suchactivitymayincludeshortvacations,promotionalappearances,andstopoverswhichare
incidentaland/orrelatedto theevent.A groupof relatedactivitiesmayalsobeconsideredto
beanevent.In thecaseof an0-1 athlete,theeventcouldbethealien'scontract.
IL Discussion
A. IssueonAppeal
The soleissueaddressedby the directoris whetherthe petitionerestablishedthat it seeksto engagethe
beneficiary'sservicesfor a specificeventor eventsas contemplatedby the regulations. The director
concludedthat"merelycomingto performtheusualday-to-daydutiesasa developmentalresearchengineer,
or anyothernormaloccupationwithoutaspecificintendedpurposedoesnotqualifyasanevent."
The petitionerfiled the Form I-129, Petitionfor a NonimmigrantWorker,on October27, 2009. The
petitionerindicatedthatit seeksto employthebeneficiaryasa developmentalresearchengineerfor 30to 35
hoursperweekfor a periodof threeyears. In a letterdatedOctober8, 2009,the petitionerdescribedthe
beneficiary'sproposedroleasfollows:
[Thepetitioner]whishes[sic]to hirea DevelopmentResearchEngineerwith responsibilities
to maintain,serviceandupgradeourexistingcoatingmachines,furtheradvanceourcurrent
coatingsand developnew recipes,upgradeand build a stronganalyticaldepartmentfor
qualitycontrolpurposesleadingusto ISO9001andAS9100certifications.Additionally,it
will be [thebeneficiary's]responsibilityto implementourstrategyof expansionin to other
marketsby designingnewcoatingmachinesanddevelopingrecipesandcoatingsfor those
Page4
marketsincludingmedicalandautomotiveapplications.Thesenew coatingswill include
Diamond-Like-Carbon(DLC)andceramiccoatings.
Wewishto hire[thebeneficiary]for aperiodof 3yearsatasalaryof $38.57perhour.
Thedirectorissuedarequestfor additionalevidence("RFE")on December28,2009,in whichsheinstructed
thepetitionerto submitthefollowing:(1)amoredetaileddescriptionof theworkthebeneficiarywill perform
for theentirerequestedperiodof validity,includingspecificjob duties.thepercentageof timeto bespenton
eachduty,thelevelof responsibilityandthehoursto beworkedperweek;(2) anexplanationasto whether
theprofferedpositionexistedbeforethealienwasemployed;(3) a copyof anywrittencontractsbetweenthe
petitioner and beneficiary, or, if there is no written contract, a summary of the terms of the oral agreement
underwhichthealienwill beemployed;(4) acompleteitineraryfor all eventsincludingtheexactperiodsfor
eachserviceandthenamesandlocationsof all locations/employers;(5) adetailedexplanationof thenatureof
theeventor eventsin whichthebeneficiarywill beperformingaswell asanexplanationof thefmite nature
of the eventor events;and(6) an explanationasto how the petitionerdeterminedthatthe eventwill be
concludedin threeyears.
In responseto theRFE,thepetitionerprovideda detailedbreakdownof thebeneficiary'sproposedactivities
in thepositionof developmentalresearchengineer.Thepetitionerindicatedthatthebeneficiaryis expected
to devoteapproximately35percentof histimeto conductingresearchanddevelopmenton productsfor new
marketsegmentsandspecifications,includingdevelopmentof awhitediamondcoatingfor dentalbracesfor a
customeranddevelopmentof a Diamond-Like-Carbon(DLC) coatingfor bearingsfor in-houseproduction
usinga BalzerBA1450coatingmachine.Thepetitionerstatedthatthebeneficiarywill spendanadditional
20 percentof histime performingprimaryandsecondaryresearchonthedurabilityandperformanceof the
petitioner'sexistingproductsfor marketingpurposes.Thebeneficiary'sremainingtimewouldbeallocatedto
maintaining,inspectingandupgradingexistingproductionmachines(15%),developingnewusesfor existing
productsandmaterials(20%),anddevelopingpatentsandsubmittingdocumentationfor futurecompanyuse
(10%).
Thepetitionerstatedthatthepositionpreviouslyexistedonaninterimbasis,andthatit is "projectinginitially
a 3 yearemploymentperiodfor [the beneficiary],"basedon the viewsof its manufacturingteam. The
petitionerexplainedthat the beneficiarywould performhis dutiesat the petitioner'sValencia,California
facility andoccasionallyattendeventssuchas professionalconferencesin the field, the exactdatesand
locationsof which would be determinedin the future.The petitionersubmitteda copyof its contractof
employmentwith thebeneficiary.In respondingto theRFE,counselfor thepetitionernotedthat"[t]heissue
of [tinerary,Event,Validity Periodhasbeendifficult to answerasthisnormallyisaskedin anEntertainment
Area."
ThedirectordeniedthepetitiononJanuary29,2010,concludingthatthepetitionerfailedto establishthatthe
beneliciarywouldbecomingto theUnitedStatesto performservicesrelatingto aspecificeventor eventsfor
anemployer.
Page5
Thedirectornotedthepetitioner'sstatementthatit haddifficulty respondingto portionsof theRFE,andthe
petitioner'sindicationthatit is "projectinginitially a 3 yearemploymentperiod"for thebeneficiary.In this
regard,thedirectorobservedthat"theconceptof aneventalludesto a specificperiodof timewith specific
startingandendingpoints,notprojectionsorguesses."Thedirectorfurtherstated:
ThePetitionermustestablishthatthereis a limitationto thebeneficiary'swork in theU.S.
Merely comingto the U.S. to performthe usualday-to-daydutiesas a developmental
researchengineer,or any othernormaloccupationwithout an intendedpurpose,doesnot
qualifyasanevent.
Becausean itineraryanda specifiedeventhavenot beenestablishedby the petitioner,it
appearsthat the only limitation to the beneficiary'swork in the U.S. is the mandated
maximumvalidityperiodof threeyearsforthisvisaclass.
Withouta completeitinerary,detailedexplanationof thenatureof theevent,anexplanation
of the finite natureof theevent,or anexplanationof how it wasdeterminedthattheevent
will beconcludedin threeyears,theServiceis unable,atthistime,to determinethatanevent,
asthetypecontemplatedbytheAct anditsimplementingregulations,exists.
In denyingthepetition,thedirectorreliedin partonthecommentaryaccompanyingthefinal O andPvisa
ruleamendingtheregulationsat 8C.F.R.§214.2to reflectchangesmadebytheMiscellaneousandTechnical
ImmigrationandNaturalizationAmendmentsof 1991,PublicLaw 102-232(December12,1991),in which
legacyImmigrationandNaturalizationService(INS)madethefollowingobservations:
AdmissionPeriodsfor O Nonimmigrants--§214.2(o)(10)
Onecommentersuggestedthatthereshouldbenoregulatorylimit onthelengthof admission
for anO nonimmigrantalien. Thesuggestioncannotbeadoptedsincetheperiodof stayfor
an O nonimmigrantis limited by the Act to the periodof time requiredby the aliento
completethe eventor eventsdescribedon the petition. An 0-1 classificationmaynot be
grantedto analiento entertheUnitedStatesto freelancein theopenmarket.An 0-1 alien
mustbecomingtotheUnitedStatesforspecificevents.
Thethree-yearperiodof timelistedin thefinal rulerelatesonlyto thealien'sinitial periodof
admission.Thealien'stotalperiodof timein theUnitedStateswill belimitedto theduration
of theevent.Thereisnomaximumtimelimit ontheO-l's totalstayin theUnitedStates.
Periodsof Admission
Page6
* * *
Exceptfor P-l athletes,thereis no maximumperiodon theonthe lengthof timethatanO
and P nonimmigrantmay remainin the United States. However,it is rare that a P-1
entertainmentgroupwould needmorethana yearto completean eventor events. Most
entertainmenteventsarefor shorterperiodsof time andO or P classificationmaynot be
grantedto analienmerelyto entertheUnitedStatesto freelanceandseekemployment.The
O andPnonimmigrantalienis admittedto theUnitedStatesto performin specificeventsas
detailedontheinitial petition.
59Fed.Reg.4l 8l8-01,41822and41828(August15,1994).
Onappeal,counselassertsthatthepetitionerdescribedin detailthespecificactivitiesin whichthebeneficiary
wouldbeengaged,andnotedthespecificgoalsthebeneficiaryis expectedto achieve,suchasdevelopinga
coatingprocessfor FDA approval,anddevelopingan in-housecoatingprocessusingequipmentalready
purchasedfor this purpose.Counselassertsthatthepetitionersubmittedampleevidenceto establishthatthe
beneñeiary'semploymentis not speculativeor otherwiseprohibitedby the regulationsor thedefinitionof
"event."
In supportof theappealthepetitionersubmitsanaddendumto its RFEresponseletterin whichit provides
furtherexplanationasto why thebeneficiary'srequestedemploymentperiodof threeyearsis criticalto the
company.Thepetitionerprovidesadditionalexplanationregardingthebeneficiary'sproposedresearchand
developmentactivities,thepetitioner'sneedsfor hisspecificexperienceandskills,andprojectedcompletion
datesfor eachof the five areasof responsibilityto beassignedto thebeneficiarv.Thepetitionerfurther
indicatesthat it "hasbudgetedandallocatedthe fundsnecessaryto completeall tasksat the endof the
durationof theO-1visa."
B. Analysis
Uponreview,theAAOagreeswithcounsel'sassertionsandfindsthatthedirector'sinterpretationof thedefinition
of "event"isoverlynarrowandrestrictive.Giventhenatureof thebeneficiary'sAeldandthepositionoffered,the
AAOfindsthatthepetitionerhasmetitsevidentiaryburdenbyexplainingthebeneficiary'stermsof employment,
providingacopyof itscontractwiththebeneñeiary,andprovidingadetailedexplanationofthenatureandscope
of thebeneficiary'sproposedactivities,asrequiredby8C.F.R.§214.2(o)(2)(ii)(B)and(C).
Thedirectorconcludedthatthe beneficiary"will beperformingthe usualdutiesof someoneemployedasa
developmentalresearchengineer,"but did not provideadequatesupportfor herconclusionthatthis typeof
employmentsituationisprohibitedbythestatuteandregulations.TheAAO notesthatalienswithextraordinary
ability in athleticshiredby professionalsportsteams,aswell asalienswith extraordinaryability in education
hiredby U.S.universities,areoftenhiredundermulti-yearcontractsandalsoperformthe "normalduties"of
Page7
professionalathletesoruniversityprofessors.respectively.However.suchemploymentcircumstancesareclearly
consideredto bewithinthedeñnitionof "event"at8C.F.R.§214.2(o)(3)(ii),whichincludesan"academicyear"
and,forathletes,"thealien'scontract,"asqualifyingactivities.
Theregulatorydefinitionof "event"providesonlyashortlistof examplesof qualifyingactivitiesandspecifically
statesthatit is notanexhaustiveor definitivelist, thussuggestingthatofficerswouldhavethediscretionto
determineonacase-by-casebasiswhatconstitutesaqualifying"event."Thedefinitionincludesamongthelistof
qualifyingactivitiestheterm"engagement"whichis commonlydefinedas"employment,especiallyfor agiven
periodoftime,"or"aperiodof employment."Webster's11NewWorldCollegeDictionary373(3rdEd.200l ).
This flexibility in the regulatorydefinition is also reflectedin the evidentiaryrequirementsat 8 C.F.R.
§214.2(o)(2)(ii)(C)which instructthe petitionerto provide"an explanationof the natureof theeventsor
activities,andto provideacopyof anyitinerary."Theregulationsrecognizethatnoteverypetitionerwill be
able to providean itineraryor evidenceof a list of discreteperformances,competitions,or tour dates,
dependingon the field of employment.Thedefinitionof eventmustbe interpretedbroadly,asthe visa
classificationis expectedto encompassadiversearrayof occupationsspanningtheprofessions,athletics,and
theartsandentertainmentfields.
In discussingeventsandperiodsof admissionfor O-l aliens,thecommentaryaccompanyingthefinal rule
revealsa concernthat O-1 aliensnot be permittedto freelancein the openmarketandthat they not be
permittedto entertheUnitedStatesfor thepurposeof independentlyseekingemployment.Thecommentary
doesnotexpressanyparticularconcernthatO-l aliensmustbeprohibitedfromperformingthe"usualday-to-
dayduties"of any"normaloccupation."Here.thebeneficiaryis anaccomplishedscientistsoughtafterby a
privatecompanyto assistwith thetechnologicaldevelopmentof its highly-complexproducts.Thereis no
reasonto believethathewouldengagein anyactivitiesotherthanthosedescribedin detailinthepetition.
Whileit is necessaryto requireanitineraryof discreteperformancesor appearancesfor touringmusiciansor
otherartistsandentertainerswhoaretraditionallyself-employed,andthereforemorelikely to freelancetheir
servicesoncemtheUnitedStates,it is notreasonableto requestanitineraryfor ascientist.In contrastto an
artistor entertainer,thebeneficiaryin thiscaseis ascientistwith expertisein thedevelopmentof commercial
productsfor privateemployerswho possessesa firm offer of employmentfrom a U.S.companyto perform
workin hisfield.
The director'snarrow interpretationof what constitutesa qualifying "event" is untenableas it would
essentiallyprohibit privatesectoremployersfrom hiring O-l scientists,engineers,and businessleaders.
Rather,suchpersonswouldbelimitedto eitherworkingin academiaor comingto theUnitedStatesonlyfor
conventions,conferences,to deliverlectures,or to workon scientificor business"projects."Giventhatthe
regulationsallow for an initial three-yearperiod of stay, consistentwith other employment-based
nonimmigrantclassificationssuchas the H-lB and L-l categories,it is reasonableto believethat the
"engagement"includedin theregulatorydefinitionof "event"mayincludeathree-yearofferof employment
in thealien'sareaof extraordinaryability, includingthe"normal"dutiesof one'sprofession.Of course,the
Page8
petitionermuststill providea detaileddescriptionof the natureof theactivitiesandprovidea copyof its
writtencontractor a summaryof thetermsof its oralagreementwith thealien. Thepetitionerhasfulfilled
theserequirements.
Thedirectorcitedno othergroundsfor denyingthepetition,anduponde novoreview,the AAO seesno
additionalbasisfor denial. Accordingly,the AAO will withdrawthedirector'sdecisiondatedJanuary29,
2010andapprovethe petition. As alwaysin theseproceedings,the burdenof proof restssolelywith the
petitioner.Section291of theAct,8 U.S.C.§ 1361.Uponreview,thepetitionerhasmetitsburdenof proof.
ORDER: Theappealissustained.