PetitionLens
All decisions
SustainedEB-2 · Appeal

Hospital

Clinical & health · decided 2018-04-18 · TSC · APR182018_01B5203

Official PDF on uscis.gov

How each part of the test was decided

Read from the appeals office's own sentences by fixed rules, not from the Director's findings or the petitioner's arguments. Each result shows the sentence it came from. The official PDF controls.

  • Step 0Eligible for EB-2Met
    Why
    Therefore, the Beneficiary meets the alternative educational and experience requirements of the labor certification and is eligible for classification as an advanced degree professional. p. 2
    The Director's denial rested on this
    The Director found that the Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary had the requisite experience to meet the minimum requirement of the labor certification and to qualify for classification as an advanced degree professional. p. 1
  • Prong 1Merit and national importanceNot decided

    No finding on this in the appeals office's own words.

  • Prong 2Well positioned to advance itNot decided

    No finding on this in the appeals office's own words.

  • Prong 3Worth waiving the job offerNot decided

    No finding on this in the appeals office's own words.

The decision in brief

Sentences picked out of the text automatically. Read them in context below; the official PDF controls.

What the AAO decided

Main reasons given

  • We find that this degree is equivalent to a bachelor's degree from a U.S. college or university. See in text
  • We find that the Beneficiary's prior employment satisfies the labor certification's alternative minimum requirement of five years of qualifying employment, and includes "at least five years ofprogressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty" of medical technologist, as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(l)(B) to be eligible for classification as an advanced degree professional. See in text
Read the full decision (2 pages)

Objections found (0)

Automated tags. Each shows the sentence that triggered it.

No catalog objection was detected in the analysis section.

    Full decision

    OCR text from the official PDF, reformatted for reading. Scan errors carry over; the PDF controls.

    Highlighted: Outcome (2) AAO finding (2)Matter of X citation
    Decision header
    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services · MATTER OF P-G-1-1- · APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION · Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office · DATE: APR. 18, 2018 · PETITION: FORMI-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER

    The Petitioner, a hospital, seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a medical technologist. It requests classification of the Beneficiary as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree under the second preference immigrant category. Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). This "EB-2" classification allows a U.S. employer to sponsor a professional with an advanced degree for lawful permanent resident status.

    The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition. The Director found that the Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary had the requisite experience to meet the minimum requirement of the labor certification and to qualify for classification as an advanced degree professional.

    On appeal the Petitioner asserts that its previously submitted evidence establishes that the Beneficiary has more than live years of post-baccalaureate progressive experience as a medical technologist, which meets the minimum alternative requirement of the labor certification and makes her eligible for advanced degree professional classification.

    Upon de novo review, we will sustain the appeal.

    A petition for an advanced degree professional must be supported by documentary evidence showing that the beneficiary has either a "United States advanced degree or a foreign equivalent degree" or "a United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree, and ... at least live years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(1)(A) and (B). The petitioner must establish that the beneficiary meets all of the educational, training, experience, and other requirements of the offered position, as stated on the labor certification, by the petition's 1 priority date.

    See Mal!er oj"Wing"s Tea House, 161&N Dec.,J58, 159 (Act. Reg' I Comm'r 1977).

    In this case the labor certification requires either a master's degree in medical technology, or a foreign educational equivalent, and one year of experience in the job offered or, alternatively, a bachelor's degree in medical technology, or a foreign educational equivalent, and live years of The "priority date" of a petition is the date the underlying labor certification was filed with the Department of Labor. See 8 C.F.R. ~ 204.5(d).

    Malfer r~fP-G-H- qualifying experience. The labor certification asserts that the Beneficiary meets the alternative minimum requirements of a bachelor's degree and five years of qualifying experience.

    The record shows that the Beneficiary was awarded a bachelor of science degree in medical technology by the University of in the Philippines. We find that this degree is equivalent to a bachelor's degree from a U.S. college or university. The record also includes employment experience letters from the Beneficiary's former employers, as stated on the labor certification, which document the Beneficiary's possession of at least five years of qualifying · post-baccalaureate progressive experience. We find that the Beneficiary's prior employment satisfies the labor certification's alternative minimum requirement of five years of qualifying employment, and includes "at least five years ofprogressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty" of medical technologist, as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(l)(B) to be eligible for classification as an advanced degree professional.

    Therefore, the Beneficiary meets the alternative educational and experience requirements of the labor certification and is eligible for classification as an advanced degree professional.

    ORDER: The appeal is sustained.

    Cite as Maller ofP-G-H-, ID# 1161340 (AAO Apr. 18, 2018)