This appeal was not successful at this stage
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish that the general manager position qualifies as a specialty occupation and separately failed to show the beneficiary possesses a qualifying degree or its equivalent.
A full-service restaurant petitioned for an H-1B visa to employ a foreign national as a general manager. The Director denied the petition, and the AAO affirmed on appeal, finding the position description created ambiguity because it included marketing, advertising, and broad financial duties inconsistent with the 'Food Service Managers' occupational code designated on the LCA. The AAO found these duties more closely matched 'General and Operations Managers' or 'Marketing Managers,' and the petitioner failed to resolve this inconsistency. Additionally, both the DOL Handbook and O*NET data indicated that a bachelor's degree is not normally required for Food Service Manager roles. Separately, the AAO found the beneficiary's credential evaluations were improper because the evaluators lacked authority to grant college-level credit at accredited institutions, and neither the evaluations nor reference letters demonstrated that the beneficiary worked alongside degree-holders in the relevant specialty, as required by regulation.
What failed: The position description included duties spanning multiple occupational categories (food service, marketing, and general operations), creating ambiguity the petitioner could not resolve. Expert opinion letters failed to explain why a specific bachelor's degree was required or to address DOL and O*NET data showing the occupation generally does not require a degree. Credential evaluators lacked the regulatory authority to equate the beneficiary's experience to a U.S. bachelor's degree, and reference letters were too general to satisfy the equivalency requirements.
Takeaway: For H-1B petitions in hospitality or restaurant management, ensure the LCA occupational code precisely matches the actual duties described, and avoid including duties that stray into higher-level occupational categories. If a beneficiary lacks a qualifying degree, credential evaluations must come from accredited university officials with authority to grant college-level credit, and reference letters must specifically address how the beneficiary applied specialized knowledge alongside degreed colleagues.
Cases like this are frequently used by attorneys when responding to RFEs or building initial petitions. The evidence patterns that worked (or failed) here directly reflect what USCIS officers look for when evaluating H-1B criteria.
● Evidence that moved the needle
- See summary above for details.
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- The position description included duties spanning multiple occupational categories (food service, marketing, and general operations), creating ambiguity the petitioner could not resolve
- Expert opinion letters failed to explain why a specific bachelor's degree was required or to address DOL and O*NET data showing the occupation generally does not require a degree
- Credential evaluators lacked the regulatory authority to equate the beneficiary's experience to a U.S
- bachelor's degree, and reference letters were too general to satisfy the equivalency requirements.
Opinion letter from Dean Emeritus of Business — did not address the LCA occupational category conflict and listed expertise requirements outside the scope of Food Service Managers.
Three expert opinion letters from industry/academic professionals — all failed to explain why a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty is required for the position, and none addressed the DOL Handbook or O*NET data indicating a degree is not required.
Academic equivalency evaluation from credential evaluator — evaluator was not an official at an accredited university with authority to grant college-level credit, and the evaluation incorrectly identified the beneficiary's country of origin.
Opinion letter from university professor on beneficiary qualifications — university did not appear to offer an undergraduate hospitality management program and no evidence of a credit-for-experience program was provided.
Reference letters from the beneficiary's previous supervisors — provided only general job duties and did not demonstrate theoretical and practical application of specialized knowledge or that colleagues held qualifying degrees.
The petitioner designated the position under SOC code 11-9051 (Food Service Managers) on the LCA, but the described duties — including marketing, advertising, budgeting, and developing financing — are more consistent with General and Operations Managers (SOC 11-1021) or Marketing Managers (SOC 11-2021), creating an internal contradiction the petitioner failed to resolve.
The expert evaluators exceeded their authority by determining that the beneficiary's work experience equated to a U.S. baccalaureate degree, a determination reserved exclusively for USCIS under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5).
Neither credential evaluator was shown to be an official with authority to grant college-level credit at an accredited college or university with a program for granting credit based on training and/or experience, as required by 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(1).
Completed
I-129 filed
General manager of a full-service restaurant, responsible for operations, marketing, budgeting, and business administration
Completed
Director — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2021-07-19
AAO decision — Dismissed
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish that the general manager position qualifies as a specialty occupation and separately failed to show the beneficiary possesses a qualifying degree or its equivalent.
If you're appealing a similar decision, I-290B must be filed within 30 days of personal service of the denial, or 33 days if mailed.
Find this useful? A coffee helps keep Case Reviewer free and ad-free.
Buy me a coffee