CARON INTERNATIONAL

19 I. & N. Dec. 791
CourtBoard of Immigration Appeals
DecidedJuly 1, 1988
DocketID 3085
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 19 I. & N. Dec. 791 (CARON INTERNATIONAL) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Board of Immigration Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
CARON INTERNATIONAL, 19 I. & N. Dec. 791 (bia 1988).

Opinion

Interim Decision #3085

MATTER OF CARON INTERNATIONAL, INC.

In Visa Petition Proceedings

LIN 88 144 0002

Decided by Commissioner on October 28, 1988

(1) In order to establish a person has preeminence in business, a petitioner must demonstrate that the person has skills and recognition in business substantially above that ordinarily encountered. The fact that a beneficiary is well known for achievements in his or her field is an important aspect of preeminence. (2) Not every person who owns or manages a business or holds a high position in a business is considered preeminent. Success or outstanding performance in busi- ness alone is not the same as preeminence. (3) General managerial occupations such as theca of vice-president are normally not considered to be professional endeavors requiring specific academic degrees. A manager is not considered to be a member of the professions unless he or she is qualified for, and intends to work in, a professional occupation requiring the at- tainment of such a degree. (4) Certain occupations may be in transition from nonprofessional to professional status. In such cases, employers may be able to establish a position is professional in nature by demonstrating that the higher standard of a specific baccalaureate- level degree has been consistently required for the more complex positions within their organizations. (5) Substantial academic course work in a professional field combined with profes- sional experience and achievement may be considered equivalent to a bachelor's degree. While there are a number of colleges and universities in the United States which give credit towards a degree based on experience, none will grant a bacca- laureate degree based on a person's experience alone. (6) The Immigration and Naturalization Service may, in its discretion, use as adviso- ry opinions statements from universities, professional organizations, or other sources submitted in evidence as expert testimony. However, where an opinion is not hi accord with other information or is in any way questionable, the Service is not required to accept or may give less weight to that evidence.

ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER Joseph Minsky Minsky, Feiertag, McCormick & Hallagan 122 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 1800 Chicago, Illinois 60603

This is an appeal from the adverse decision of the director, Northern Regional Service Center. The appeal will be sustained. Interim Decision #3085

The petitioner is a manufacturer and dyer of hand knitting and industrial yarns. It seeks to classify the beneficiary as a nonimmi- grant of distinguished merit and ability pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(H)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(H)(i) (1982), based on its intent to employ him as its vice-president of manufacturing. The director determined the petitioner had failed to establish that the proposed position is within the professions or requires a person of distinguished merit and ability. The director also found the petitioner had failed to establish that the beneficiary has at least a bachelor's degree or its equivalent or that he is preeminent in his field of endeavor. On appeal, counsel asserts the proposed position is professional, and the beneficiary has attained professional status even though he does not have a bachelor's degree. Counsel also asserts the bene- ficiary is preeminent in the field of textile manufacturing. As noted by the director, distinguished merit and ability may be established in either of two ways. Persons classifiable as profession- als based on their academic credentials within the meaning of sec- tion 101(a)(32) of the Act are classifiable as aliens of distinguished merit and ability. Matter of Essex Cryogenics Industries, Inc., 14 I&N Dec. 196 (D.A.C. 1972). Matter of General Atomic Company, 17 I&N Dec. 532 (Comm. 1980). Also, aliens of prominence, renown, or preeminence in their field of endeavor are classifiable as aliens of distinguished merit and ability. Matter of Shaw, 11 I&N Dec. 277 (D.D. 1965). In 1970, the Immigration and Nationality Act was amended to permit the temporary entry to the United States of "H-1" nonim- migrants to perform services which are either temporary or perma- nent in nature. The House Committee Report which accompanied the legislation, H.R. Rep. No. 851, 91st Cong., 2d Seas., reprinted in 1970 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 2750, 2752-53, stated: Distinguished merit and ability implies a degree of skill and recognition substan- tially above that ordinarily encountered to the extent that a person so described is prominent or has a high level of education in his field of endeavor. (Emphasis added.) Careful review of the record of proceeding in the light of the above administrative case law and legislative history reflects the petitioner has not established the beneficiary is eligible for "H-1" classification based on membership in the professions. However, the petitioner has established the beneficiary is eligible for this classification based on prominence or preeminence as a business executive. Similarly, the petitioner has not established that the proposed position is within the professions but has established that Interim Decision #3085

the proposed position requires a prominent or preeminent business executive.

MEANING OF PROFESSIONAL POSITION The Supreme Court interpreted the term "profession" in United States v. Laws, 163 U.S. 258 (1896), in which it adopted the follow- ing meaning of "profession" from the Century Dictionary: The word implies professed attainments in special knowledge, as distinguished from mere skill, a practical dealing with affairs, as distinguished from mere study or investigation; and an application of such knowledge to uses for others, as a vo- cation, as distinguished from its pursuit for its own purposes. Id. at 266. The Court concluded that a "chemist who places his knowledge acquired from a study of the science to the use of others, as he may be employed by them" is "engaged in. the prac- tice of a profession." Id. The Supreme Court's interpretation of the term "profession" as requiring knowledge or learning, as opposed to mere skill, was af- firmed in subsequent case law. See .Pizarro v. District Director of United States IAN Serv., 415 F.2d 481 (9th Cir. 1969); Javier v. Im- migration RE Naturalization Service, 335 F. Supp. 1391 (N.D. Ill. 1971); Buckley v. Gibney, 332 F. Supp. 790 (S.D.N.Y. 1971); Yau v. District Director of U.S. Immigration & Nat. Serv., 293 F. Supp. '717 (C.D. Cal. 1968); Abbott v. United States, 151 F. Supp. 929 (Ct. Cl. 1957). The term "profession" is defined by example in section 101(a)(32) of the Act. That section states: The term "profession" shall include but not be limited to architects, engineers, lawyers, physicians, surgeons, and teachers in elementary or secondary schools, colleges, academies, or seminaries. The clearest common denominator for professional standing is at least a baccalaureate degree awarded for academic study in a spe- cific discipline or narrow range of disciplines. This requirement is explained in numerous Immigration and Naturalization Service precedent decisions dating back to 1966. E.g., Matter of Portugues Do Atlantico Information Bureau, Inc., 19 I&N Dec. 194 (Comm. 1984); Matter of Ahmed, 12 MEN Dec. 498 (R.C. 1967); Matter of Pa- lanky, 12 I&N Dec. 66 (R.C. 1966); Matter of Shin, 11 I&N Dec. 686 (D.D. 1966). It is also well established that some professions (for ex- ample, those of physicians, surgeons, psychologists, and librarians) require advanced degrees.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

HAMPAPUR VENKATNARAYAN v. JADDOU
M.D. North Carolina, 2024
Parzenn Partners LLC v. Baran
D. Massachusetts, 2020
Viraj, LLC v. U.S. Attorney General
578 F. App'x 907 (Eleventh Circuit, 2014)
SKIRBALL CULTURAL CENTER
25 I. & N. Dec. 799 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 2012)
Shanti, Inc. v. Reno
36 F. Supp. 2d 1151 (D. Minnesota, 1999)
SAFETRAN
20 I. & N. Dec. 49 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 I. & N. Dec. 791, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/caron-international-bia-1988.