.

:"~on-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office

MATTER OF A-A-T-INC. DATE: JAN. 23.2018

APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER DECISION

PETITION : FOR\1 1-129. PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER

The Petitioner seeks to temporarily employ the Beneticiary as a ··software test engineer·· under the H-lB nonimmigrant classification for specialty occupations. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 10l(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 8 U.S.C. § 110l(a)(I5)(H)(i)(b). The H-18 program allovvs a U.S. employer to temporarily employ a qualitied 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 Fom1 1-129. Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker. concluding that the record did not establish that: (I) the proftered position qualifies as a specialty occupation: and (2) the Petitioner is a United States employer. as described at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii).

In its appeaL the Petitioner submits additional evidence and asserts that the Director erred in denying the petition. Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal.

I. PROFFERED POSITION

The Petitioner is a computer consulting company. According to the Petitioner. the Beneficiary wi ll be employed in-house at its office in New Jersey. tor the duration of the requested period.

In response to the Director"s request for evidence, the Petitioner submitted a detailed statement of the Beneficiary"s day-to-day duties and responsibilities in the proffered position. as foll ows:

Category Duties % Time Design and • Create or maintain databases of known test detects. 5% Technical • Design test plans, scenarios, scripts. or procedures. Specification • Design or develop automated testing tools. Development • Conduct software compatibility tests with programs. 10%

hardware. operating systems. or network environments

Malter of A-A-T-Inc.

Monitor Test Plans

Installation

Review and Implementation

Testing & QA

• Develop or specify standards, methods, or procedures to determine product quality or release readiness.

• Develop testing programs that address areas such as database impacts, software scenanos, regressiOn testing, negative testing, error or bug retests. or usability.

• Document software defects. usmg a bug tracking system. and report defects to software developers.

• Plan test schedules or strategies in accordance with project scope or delivery dates.

• Monitor bug resolution efforts and track successes. 15% • Document test procedures to ensure replicability and

compliance with standards. • Evaluate or recommend software for testing or bug

tracking. • Identify program deviance from standards. and

suggest modifications to ensure compliance. • Identify, analyze, and document problems with

program function. output, online screen. or content. • Monitor program performance to ensure efficient

and problem-free operations. • Install and contigure recreations of software I 0%

production environments to allow testing of software performance.

• Install. maintain. or use software testing programs. • Investigate customer problems referred by technical

support. • Participate 111 product design revtews to provide 15%

input on functional requirements. product designs. schedules, or potential problems.

• Perform initial debugging procedures by reviewing configuration tiles. logs. or code pieces to determine breakdown source.

• Provide feedback and recommendations to developers on sotlware usability and functionality.

• Provide technical support during software installation or configuration.

• Review software documentation to ensure technical accuracy. compliance. or completeness. or to mitigate risks.

• Test system modifications to prepare for 35% implementation.

2

Matler ofA-A-T- Inc.

,-------------.-----------------------------------------~-,------,

• Perform initial debugging procedures by reviewing configuration files. logs. or code pieces to determine breakdown source.

• Plan test schedules or strategies in accordance with project scope or delivery dates.

• Provide feedback and recommendations to developers on software usability and functionality.

• Test system modifications to prepare for implementation.

• Update automated test scripts to ensure currency. • Collaborate with field staff or customers to evaluate

or diagnose problems and recommend possible solutions.

• Coordinate user and/or third party testing. • Conduct historical analyses of test results. • Test system modifications to prepare f(Jr

implementation. • Visit beta testing sites to evaluate software

performance. ~------------+-~~~~~~-------------------------------r------~

• Coordinate installation of the system Documentation and User Training

• Train operations staff on the operation of the system • Prepare documentation - user manuals. design

documents etc.

II. SPECIALTY OCCUPATION

10%

We will first determine whether the record of proceedings establishes that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation.

A. Legal Framework

Section 214(i)(l) of the Act defines the term ·'specialty occupation .. as an occupation that requires:

(A) theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and

(8) attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent) as a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States.

The regulation at 8 C.F.R. ~ 214.2(h)(4)(ii) largely restates this statutory definition. but adds a non­exhaustive list of fields of endeavor. In addition. the regulations provide that the proffered position must meet one of the following criteria to qualify as a specialty occupation:

Matter ofA-A-T- Inc.

(1) A baccalaureate or higher degree or its equivalent is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the particular position;

(2) The degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations or. in the alternative, an employer may show that its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with a degree;

(3) The employer normally requires a degree or its equivalent for the position; or

( -1) The nature of the specific duties [is] so specialized and complex that knowledge required to perform the duties is usually associated with the attainment of a baccalaureate or higher degree.

8 C.F.R. ~ 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A). We have consistently interpreted the term .. degree .. to mean not just any baccalaureate or higher degree. but one in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proposed position. See Royal S'iam Corp. v. Chertofr 484 F.3d 139. 14 7 (1st Cir. 2007) (describing "a degree requirement in a specific specialty .. as ·'one that relates directly to the duties and responsibilities of a particular position .. ); Defensor v. Meissner. 201 F.3d at 387.

B. Analysis

For the reasons set out below. we have determined that the proffered position does not qualify as a specialty occupation. Specifically. the record does not establish that the job duties reqUire an educational background. or its equivalent. commensurate with a specialty occupation. 1

I. Position Requirements

As a preliminary matter. the Petitioner has provided inconsistent information regarding the minimum requirements for the proffered position. The table below summarizes the variances in the requirements.

Record of Proceedings Degree Requirements

Petitioner's Letter- • computer science, management information systems. business March 31. 2016 (page 3) admin .. electrical engineering. electronics engmeenng.

commerce. economic. a relative analytic or scientific discipline. or the equivalent

1 The Petitioner submitted documentation to support the H-1 B petition. including evidence regarding the proffered position and its business operations. While we may not discuss every document submitted. we have reviewed and considered each one.

4

Matter of A-A-T- Inc.

Affidavit of Petitioner science. mathematics. .--:--

- • computer engmeenng . statiStiCS. June 20. 2017 (page 2) management information systems. or related discipline

Ref. Detailed Statement - • computer science. engineering. or related discipline Specialty Occupation-June 20. 2017 (page I)

Appeal Brief (page 4) • electrical engineering. computer engineering. computer science . electronics engineering or related discipline

The Petitioner did not provide an explanation for the variances in the requirements.

2. Degree Requirement- General Degree

In addition, the Petitioner's claim that a bachelor's degree in business administration is sufficient for the proffered position is inadequate to establish that it qualifies as a specialty occupation. A petitioner must demonstrate that the protlered position requires a precise and specific course of study that relates directly and closely to the position in question. There must be a close correlation between the required specialized studies and the position: thus. the mere requirement of a general degree. such as business administration. without fmiher specification. does not establish the position as a specialty occupation. Cf Matter of Michael l!ertz Assoc.\ .. 19 l&N Dec. 558. 560 (Comm'r 1988) (''The mere requirement of a college degree for the sake of general education. or to obtain what an employer perceives to be a higher caliber employee. also does not establish eligibility."). Thus, while a general-purpose bachelor's degree in business administration may be a legitimate prerequisite for a particular position. requiring such a degree. without more. will not justify a finding that a particular position qualifies for classification as a specialty occupation. Royal ,\'hun Corp .. 484 F.3d at 147.2

3. Degree Requirement- Disparate Fields

Further. the Petitioner states that a degree in one of several disparate fields (specifically: computer science. management information systems. business administration. electrical engineering. computer engineering. electronics engineering. commerce. economics. mathematics. or statistics) is sufficient for the position. Notably. in general. provided the specialties are closely related. e.g .. finance and accounting. a minimum of a bachelor's or higher degree in more than one specialty is recognized as satisfying the ''degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent)" requirement of section

1 A general degree requirement does not necessarily preclude a proffered position from qualifying as a specialty occupation. For example. an entry requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in business administration with a concentration in a specific field. or a bachelor's or higher degree in business administration combined with relevant education. training. and/or experience may. in certain instances. qualify the protTered position as a specialty occupation. In either case. it must be demonstrated that the entry requirement is equivalent to a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the proffered position.

5

Malli!r 11lA-A-T- Inc.

214(i)(l )(B) of the Act. In such a case, the required "body of highly specialized knowledge" would essentially be the same.

Since there must be a close correlation between the required "body of highly specialized knowledge" and the position, however, a minimum entry requirement of degrees in disparate fields, would not meet the statutory requirement that the degree be "in the specific specialty (or its equivalent), .. unless the Petitioner establishes how each field is directly related to the duties and responsibilities of the particular position such that the required "body of highly specialized knowledge" is essentially an amalgamation of these different specialties. 3 Section 214(i)( I )(B) of the Act (emphasis added). The Petitioner has not made this showing.

The requirements provided by the Petitioner do not demonstrate that the proflered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. Thus. for these reasons. the petition cannot be approved.

4. Position Description

Moreover. a crucial aspect of this matter is whether the Petitioner has sufficiently described the duties of the proffered position such that we may discern the nature of the position and whether the position actually requires the theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge attained through at least a baccalaureate degree in a specific discipline. We find that the Petitioner has not done so.

Here. the job duties listed in the detailed statement of the Beneficiary's day-to-day duties and responsibilities provided by the Petitioner are recited virtually verbatim from the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Occupational Information Network (O*NET) Summary Report's list of duties I(H

"Software Quality Assurance Engineers and Testers"- Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code 15-1199.01.4 Providing job duties IC.1r a prof1ered position from O*NET is generally not sut1icient for establishing H-1 B eligibility. That is. while this type of description may be appropriate when defining the range of duties that may be performed within an occupational category. it cannot be relied upon by the Petitioner when discussing the duties attached to specific employment for H­I B approval as this type of generic description fails to adequately convey the substantive work that the Beneficiary will perform on a day-to-day basis. In establishing a position as qualifying as a specialty occupation. a petitioner must describe the specific duties and responsibilities to be performed by a beneficiary in the context of its business operations. demonstrate that a legitimate

' While the statutory "the" and the regulatory "a" both denote a singular "specialty." we do not so narrowly interpret these provisions to exclude positions from qualifying as specialty occupations if they permit, as a minimum entry requirement. degrees in more than one closely related specialty. See section 214(i)( I )(B) of the Act: 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). This also includes even seemingly disparate specialties providing, again. the evidence of record establishes how each acceptable, specific field of study is directly related to the duties and responsibilities of the particular position. • For additional information. see O*NET OnLine. available at https://www.onetonline.orgiJink/summary/15-1199.0 1 (last visited Jan. 19, 2018).

Maller ofA-A-T- Inc.

need for an employee exists. and substantiate that it has H-1 B caliber work for the beneficiary for the period of employment requested in the petition.

Nevertheless. assuming. for the sake of argument. that the protlcred duties as described in the record would in fact be the duties to be performed by the Beneficiary. we will analyze them and the evidence of record to determine whether the proffered position as described qualifies as a specialty occupation pursuant to the criteria at 8 C .F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A). 5

5. First Criterion

We turn first to the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(/). which requires that a baccalaureate or higher degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent is normally the minimum requirement for entry into the particular position.

On the labor condition application (LCA)6 submitted in support of the H-1 B petition. the Petitioner designated the proffered position under the occupational category .. Computer Occupations. All Other·· corresponding to the SOC code 15-1199. We often look to DOL's Occupalional Owlook Handbook (Handbook). which is an authoritative source on the duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations that it addresses. 7 However. there arc some occupations for which detailed profiles have not been developed. such as tor the occupational category ··computer Occupations. All Other. .. x Therefore. it is the Petitioner's responsibility to provide probative evidence (e.g .. documentation from objective. authoritative sources) that supports a finding that the particular position qualifies as a specialty occupation.

Here. the Petitioner references the O*NET summary report for .. Software Quality Assurance Engineers and Testers··- SOC code 15-1199.01. We reviewed the summary report and note that it provides general information regarding the occupation. It does not. however. support the Petitioner's assertion regarding the educational requirements for these positions.

We will first focus on the Specialized Vocational Preparation (SVP) rating. DOL designates the occupation as having an SVP 7 < 8. This indicates that the occupation requires ""over 2 years up to and including 4 years .. of training. While the SVP rating provides the total number of years of vocational preparation required tor a particular position. it is important to note that it docs not

5 Although some aspects of the regulatory criteria may overlap. we will address each of the criteria individually. " The Petitioner is required to submit a certified LC A to demonstrate that it will pay an H-1 B worker the higher of either the prevailing wage for the occupational classification in the '"area of employment"" or the actual wage paid by the employer to other employees with similar experience and qualifications who are performing the same services. Si!e Maller ofSimeio So!urions. LLC, 26 I&N Dec. 542. 545-546 (AAO 2015 ). 7 We do not. however. maintain that the flandhook is the exclusive source of relevant information. All of our references are to the 2016-2017 edition of the Hand hook. which may be accessed at the Internet site http:/lwww.bls.gov/ooh/. s For additional in formation. see https: l/www. bls.gov/ooh/about/data-for-occupations-not-covered-in-detai I. htm.

Matter ofA-A-T-Inc.

describe how those years are to be divided among training, formal education. and experience- and it does not specify the particular type of degree. if any. that a position would require. 9

Next, we will address DOL's designation in the summary report of the occupation as a Job Zone Four. Similar to the SVP rating, the summary report does not indicate that any academic credentials for Job Zone Four occupations must be directly related to the duties performed.

Finally. we note that the summary report provides the educational requirements of "respondents." but does not account for 100% of the "respondents." The respondents' positions within the occupation are not distinguished by career level (e.g .. entry-level. mid-level. senior-level). Additionally, the graph in the summary report does not indicate that the "education level" for the respondents must be in a specific specialty.

In the instant matter. the Petitioner has not provided sufficient documentation from a probative source to substantiate its assertion regarding the minimum requirement for entry into this patiicular position. Thus, the Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(l).

6. Second Criterion

The second criterion presents two. alternative prongs: "The degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations or. in the alternative. an employer may show that its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with a degree[.)" 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)( 4 )(iii)(A)(2) (emphasis added). The first prong casts its gaze upon the common industry practice. while the alternative prong narrows its focus to the Petitioner's specific position.

a. First Prong

To satisfy this first prong of the second criterion. the Petitioner must establish that the "degree requirement" (i.e .. a requirement of a bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent) is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations.

We generally consider the following sources of evidence to determine if there is such a common degree requirement: whether the Handhook reports that the industry requires a degree: whether the industry's professional association has made a degree a minimum entry requirement: and whether letters or atlidavits from firms or individuals in the industry attest that such firms ··routinely employ and recruit only degreed individuals." See Shanti. Inc.\'. Reno, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1151. 1165 (D. Minn. 1999) (quoting Hird!Blaker Corp.\'. ,)'am. 712 F. Supp. 1095. 1102 (S.D.N.Y. 1989) (considering these "factors" to inform the commonality of a degree requirement)).).

'' For additional information, see the O*NET Online Help webpage available at http:/!www.onetonlinc.org/help/ onlinc/svp.

.

Ma/ler qfA-A-T- Inc.

As already discussed, the Petitioner has not established that its proffered position is one for which the Handbook (or other independent, authoritative source) reports an industry-wide requirement t()r at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. Thus. we incorporate by reference the previous discussion on the matter. In addition, there are no submissions from the industry's professional association indicating that it has made a degree a minimum entry requirement.

In support of this criterion, the Petitioner provided copies of job announcements placed by other employers. However, upon review ofthe documents. we find that the Petitioner's reliance on the job announcements is misplaced.

First, we note that some of the job postings do not appear to involve organizations similar to the Petitioner. For example, several are for government contracting firms, and the other advertisements provide little or no information regarding the hiring employers. The Petitioner did not supplement the record of proceedings to establish that these advertising organizations are similar to it.

When determining whether the Petitioner and the organization share the same general characteristics, such factors may include information regarding the nature or type of organization. and, when pertinent, the particular scope of operations, as well as the level of revenue and staffing (to list just a few elements that may be considered). It is not sutlicient lor the Petitioner to claim that an organization is similar and in the same industry without providing a basis tor such an assertion.

Second. some of the advertisements do not appear to be tor parallel positions. For instance, many of the postings appear to be lor more senior, experienced employment than the proffered position.10

Moreover. some of the postings do not include sutlicient information about the duties and responsibilities tor the advertised positions. Thus. it is not possible to determine imp01iant aspects of the jobs, such as the day-to-day responsibilities, complexity of the job duties, supervisory duties (if any), and independent judgment required or the amount of supervision received . Here. the Petitioner has not sufficiently established that the primary duties and responsibilities of the advertised positions are parallel to the proffered position.

1° For instance: requires a degree and tive years of related experience: requires a degree and I 0 years of software application development experience: requires a degree and three years of related software development experience: requires a degree and five years of practical experience: and requires a degree and eight years of system testing experience. However. the Petitioner indicated that the proffered position is an entry level (Level I) position on the LC !\. ;\ prevailing wage determination starts with an entry-level wage and progresses to a higher w·age leve l atier considering the experience. education, and ski ll requirements of the Petitioner"s job opportunity. U.S. Dep' t of Labor. Emp·t & Training Admin. , Prevuiling Wage Determination Polin· Guidance, Nonagric. Imm igration Programs (rev. Nov. 2009). available at http:/fflcdatacenter.com/download/NPWHC. Guidance_ Revised __ ll _ 2009.pdf Since the advertised posit ions require prior experience, they appear to be more senior position than the proffered posit ion.

9

Matter of A -A-T- Inc.

Third, some of the postings do not indicate that at least a bachelor's degree in a directly related specific specialty (or its equivalent) is required. 11 For instance, one of the advertisements states that a bachelor's degree in computer science is preferred. A preference is not an indication of a minimum requirement. Further. some of the postings report that a bachelor's degree is required. but they do not specify any particular discipline is required. Therefore. it appears that a degree in any field (or a general degree) is sut1icient for these positions. Overall. the job postings suggest at best. that although a bachelor's degree is sometimes required for these positions. a bachelor's degree in a specific .1pecialty (or its equivalent) is not. 12

As the documentation does not establish that the Petitioner has met this prong of the regulations. further analysis regarding the specific information contained in each of the job postings is not necessary. 13 That is. not every deficit of every job posting has been addressed.

The Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to establish that a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent. is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations. Thus. the Petitioner has not satisfied the first alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. ~ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2).

b. Second Prong

We will next consider the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. ~ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2). which is satisfied if the Petitioner shows that its particular position is so complex or unique that it can be performed only by an individual with at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent.

Although the Petitioner submitted a list of job duties. including the percentage of time the Beneficiary would devote to each, the record does not include sutlicient information relevant to a detailed course of study leading to a specialty degree and the Petitioner has not established how such a curriculum is necessary to perform the duties it claims are so complex. Further. the Petitioner has

11 As discussed. the degree requirement set by the statutory and regulatory framework of the H-1 B program is not just a bachelor's or higher degree. but a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty that is directly related to the duties of the position. See section 214( i)( I )(b) of the Act and 8 C. F. R. ~ 214.2(h )( 4 )(i i). "Even if all ofthejob postings indicated that a requirement of a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations (which they do not). the Petitioner has not demonstrated what statistically valid inferences, if any. can be drawn from the advertisements with regard to determining the common educational requirements for entry into parallel positions in similar organizations. See generalh· Earl Babbic. 71Je Practice of Social Research 186-228 ( 1995). Moreover. given that there is no indication that the advertisements were randomly selected. the validity of any such inferences could not be accurately determined even if the sampling unit were sufficiently large. See id. at 195-196 (explaining that "[rJandom selection is the key to [the] process [of probability sampling]" and that "random selection offers access to the body of probability theory. which provides the basis for estimates of population parameters and estimates of error"). n The Petitioner did not provide any independent evidence of how representative the job postings are of the particular advertising employers· recruiting history for the type of job advertised. As the advertisements arc only solicitations for hire. they are not evidence of the actual hiring practices of these employers.

10

Malter of A-A-T- Inc.

designated the proffered position as a Level I position on the LCA. 14 This designation, when read in combination with the Petitioner's statements and the evidence presented, suggests that the particular position is not so complex or unique to establish the position as a specialty occupation.

The Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary is well qualified lor the position, and references her qualifications. However, the test to establish a position as a specialty occupation is not the education or experience of a proposed beneficiary, but whether the position itself requires at least a bachelor's degree in a specitic specialty. or its equivalent. Here, the Petitioner did not suniciently develop relative complexity or uniqueness as an aspect of the duties of the position. and it did not identify any tasks that are so complex or unique that only a specifically degrccd individual could perform them. Accordingly. the Petitioner has not satisfied the second alternative prong of 8 C.F.R. ~ 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(2).

7. Third Criterion

The third criterion of 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) entails an employer demonstrating that it normally requires a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent. for the position.

The record must establish that a petitioner's stated degree requirement is not a matter of preference for high-caliber candidates but is necessitated instead by performance requirements of the position. See Defensor, 201 F.3d at 387-88. Were we limited solely to reviewing a petitioner's claimed self­imposed requirements, an organization could bring any individual with a bachelor's degree to the United States to perform any occupation as long as the petitioning entity created a token degree requirement. !d. Evidence provided in support of this criterion may include, but is not limited to. documentation regarding the Petitioner's past recruitment and hiring practices. as well as information regarding employees who previously held the position.

On appeaL the Petitioner provides a printout of its job postings from its website. which lists a posting for a software test engineer position. However. the job posting docs not state the minimum educational requirements for the software test engineer position. In addition. the Petitioner submits a list of its employees with their salary information. Notably. the document does not state these individuals' job titles and the record lacks evidence establishing that their work has the same or similar substantive responsibilities, duties, and performance requirements as the protlercd position.

14 The issue here is that the Petitioner's designation of this position as a Level I position undermines its claim that the position is particularly complex, specialized, or unique compared to other positions 11·ithin the same occupation. Nevertheless, a low wage-designation does not preclude a proffered position from classification as a specialty occupation. just as a high wage-designation does not definitively establish such a classification. In ce11ain occupations (e.g., doctors or lawyers). a Levell position would still require a minimum of an advanced degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent. for entry. Similarly, however, a Level IV wage-designation would not reflect that an occupation qualifies as a specialty occupation if that higher-level position does not have an entry requirement of at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, or its equivalent. That is. a position's wage-level designation may be a relevant factor but is not itself conclusive evidence that a proffered position meets the requirements of section 214( i)( 1) of the Act.

Muller of A-A-T-Inc.

Without more, the Petitioner has not persuasively established that it normally requires at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. or its equivalent, for the position. Therefore, the Petitioner has not satisfied the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(J).

8. Fourth Criterion

The fourth criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A) requires a petitioner to establish 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 baccalaureate or higher degree in a speci tic specialty. or its equivalent.

The Petitioner asserts that the job duties of the proffered position are specialized and complex. We again refer to our earlier comments and findings with regard to the implication of the Petitioner's copying of the position duties ti·om an online source. As such. the Petitioner has not demonstrated that its proffered position is one with duties sutliciently specialized and complex to satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A)(-I).

Because the Petitioner has not satisfied one of the criteria at 8 C.f.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(A). it has not demonstrated that the proffered position qualities as a specialty occupation.

III. UNITED STATES EMPLOYER

The Director denied the petition on two separate grounds. one of which concluded that the Petitioner is not a United States employer, as described at 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(ii). However. we will reserve this issue as we have concluded that the proffered position is not a specialty occupation.

IV. CONCLUSION

The Petitioner did not establish that the proffered position is a specialty occupation. 15

ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.

Cite as lvfatter ojA-A-T- Inc.. lD# 862956 (AAO Jan. 23. 2018)

" Because this issue precludes approval of the petition. we will not address any of the additional issues we have observed in our de novo review of this matter.

12