PetitionLens
Log inGet started
All decisions
SustainedEB-2 · Appeal

Software consulting and development company

Computing, AI & data · decided 2017-02-28 · TSC · FEB282017_02B5203

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-2Not decided

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

  • 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.

Summary sentence

Upon review of the entire record, we conclude that the Petitioner has established that the Beneficiary had all the education, training, and experience specified on the ETA Form 9089 as of the priority date, and that her education and experience make her eligible for classification as an advanced degree professional. See in text

What the AAO decided

  • Upon de novo review, we will sustain the appeal. See in text
  • Accordingly, the petition will be approved under section 203(b)(2) of the Act for classification of the Beneficiary as an advanced degree professional. See in text
  • ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 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 (3)Matter of X citation
    Decision header
    Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office · MATTER OF E-T-, INC. DATE: FEB. 28, 2017 · APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION · PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER

    The Petitioner, a software consulting and development company, seeks to employ the beneficiary as a senior software engineer. It requests classification of the Beneficiary as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree under the second preference immigrant classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). This employment-based immigrant classification allows a U.S. employer to sponsor a professional with an advanced degree for lawful permanent resident status.

    The Petitioner tiled a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, accompanied by a labor certification, ETA Form 9089, certified by the Department of Labor (DOL). The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the petition on the ground that the Beneficiary did not meet the educational requirement of the labor certification.

    The matter is now before us on appeal. Upon de novo review, we will sustain the appeal. To be eligible for approval, a beneficiary must have all the education, training, and experience specified on the labor certification as of the petition's priority date. See Matter of Wing's Tea House, 16 l&N 158 (Act. Reg'l Comm'r 1977). The petitioner must also establish its continuing ability to pay the proffered· wage of the job offered from the priority date up to the present. See 8 C.F.~. § 204.5(g)(2). The priority date of the instant petition is June 30, 2015, which is the date the underlying labor certification was accepted for processing by the DOL. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(d).

    Upon review of the entire record, we conclude that the Petitioner has established that the Beneficiary had all the education, training, and experience specified on the ETA Form 9089 as of the priority date, and that her education and experience make her eligible for classification as an advanced degree professional. We also determine that the Petitioner has established that it more likely than not has had the continuing ability to pay the proffered wage from the priority date up to the present. Accordingly, the petition will be approved under section 203(b)(2) of the Act for classification of the Beneficiary as an advanced degree professional.

    The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. See Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. The Petitioner has met that burden.

    · Matter ofE-T-, Inc.

    ORDER: The appeal is sustained.

    Cite as Matter ofE-T-, Inc., ID# 73737 (AAO Feb..28, 2017)