Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b )(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER:
INSTRUCTIONS:
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. This is a non precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish agency policy through non-precedent decisions.
Thank you,
~uk/hJtl(~
Ron Rosenberg
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office www.uscis.gov
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition and the matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be sustained.
The petitioner describes itself as a commercial banking institution. It seeks to permanently employ the beneficiary in the United States as a computer systems analyst. The petitioner requests classification of the beneficiary as an advanced degree professional pursuant to section 203(b )(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2).
At issue in this case is whether the beneficiary possesses an advanced degree as required by the terms of the labor certification and the requested preference classification.
The AAO conducts appellate review on a de novo basis. See Soltane v. DOl, 381 F.3d 143, 145 (3d Cir. 2004).
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 I&N 158 (Act. Reg. Corum. 1977). The priority date of the petition is July 24, 2012, which is the date the labor certification was accepted for processing by the DOL. See 8 C.P.R. § 204.5(d). The Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I-140) was filed on October 24, 2012.
Upon review of the entire record, the petitioner established that the beneficiary possessed an advanced degree and the work experience required by the terms of the labor certification and the requested preference classification. Therefore, the beneficiary qualifies for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree under section 203(b )(2) of the Act. The director's decision denying the petition is reopened and the petition will be approved. The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. The petitioner has met that burden.
ORDER: The appeal is sustained, and the petition is approved.