## Facts

- A software development and consulting company based in Livonia, Michigan filed an H-1B petition seeking to employ a beneficiary as a programmer-analyst.
- The beneficiary was to be employed by the petitioner but perform services at third-party client sites under the petitioner’s contracts with outside companies.
- The petitioner submitted master contracts with five third-party client companies.
- The petitioner did not submit beneficiary-specific work orders, purchase orders, or comparable documentation tying the beneficiary to specific projects, duties, locations, or dates.
- USCIS denied the petition, and the petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO).
- The appeal record, as characterized publicly, centered on missing or insufficient Labor Condition Application (LCA) documentation for the intended employment locations and assignments.

## Issues

1. Whether the petition was supported by required, properly certified LCAs covering the beneficiary’s intended work locations and terms of employment.
2. Whether the petitioner established that the programmer-analyst position qualified as a “specialty occupation,” particularly in a third-party placement arrangement.
3. Whether the petitioner provided adequate, non-speculative evidence of specific specialty-occupation work for the requested period of H-1B employment.

## Decision

- The AAO dismissed the appeal and upheld the denial of the H-1B petition.
- The AAO determined that the petitioner’s documentation did not meet the evidentiary requirements associated with third-party worksite placement, including LCA-related proof and assignment-specific evidence.
- The AAO found the master contracts, without beneficiary-specific documentation, insufficient to establish the claimed employment terms and qualifying work for the requested validity period.

## Legal Principles

- An H-1B petitioner must support the petition with a properly certified LCA covering the actual place(s) of employment and the terms under which the beneficiary will work, consistent with 8 U.S.C. § 1182(n) and implementing regulations.
- The petitioner bears the burden to establish eligibility, including that the proffered position is a “specialty occupation” and that the beneficiary will perform duties consistent with the petition, under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4).
- Where work will occur at third-party sites, the petitioner must submit credible, assignment-specific evidence (e.g., statements of work, work orders, or similar documentation) showing the duties, location(s), duration, and availability of the claimed work; generalized master service agreements alone may be inadequate.
- USCIS and the AAO may deny an H-1B petition when the record does not reliably show that required LCA coverage and specific qualifying work exist for the requested period.

## Conclusion

The AAO affirmed denial of the H-1B petition because the petitioner did not provide sufficient LCA-related documentation and beneficiary-specific evidence establishing specialty-occupation employment at third-party worksites for the requested time period.


In re _______ [The Case of the Missing Labor Condition Applications], 2008 Immig. Rptr. LEXIS 20168 (A.A.O. 2008)