Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

In re _______ [The Case of the Specialty Occupation and the L.A. Auto Show]

2006 Immig. Rptr. LEXIS 18540 (2006)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 28,700+ case briefs...

In re _______ [The Case of the Specialty Occupation and the L.A. Auto Show]

Administrative Appeals Office

2006 Immig. Rptr. LEXIS 18540 (2006)

Facts

The petitioner (plaintiff) was a company that managed and produced the L.A. Auto Show. The petitioner sought to employ the beneficiary as a human-resources manager on an H-1B visa under the Immigration and Nationality Act. The director of the California Service Center denied the petition, and the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) initially denied the petitioner’s appeal. The petitioner filed a complaint with the United States District Court for the Central District of California seeking declaratory relief. Then, on its own motion, the AAO reopened the proceeding to reconsider its decision. The AAO requested additional information from the petitioner concerning the specific job duties to be performed by the beneficiary. The petitioner’s job duties included hiring staff, drafting a policy manual, training, recruiting, developing compensation plans, preparing budgets for personnel, maintaining employment records, and developing and implementing personnel policies. The beneficiary had a bachelor’s degree in psychology from a college in the Philippines. Under the Occupation Outlook Handbook (handbook), entry-level human-resources manager positions could be filled by individuals with a wide range of degrees. The petitioner submitted a letter prepared by a University of Minnesota professor proffering that the performance of the human-resources position offered by the petitioner would impose a degree requirement on the beneficiary.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 546,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 28,700 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 28,700 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership