BUN

Interim incision

Km= or BUN

In Visa Petition Proceedings

A-17288881

Decided by Regional Comnniseianer September 6, .1967

An approved visa petition according third preference classification as an engi-

neer to beneficiary who after entry intends to work part time in another field

in order to support his family while he is taking graduate work in his pro-

fessional field, may be revalidated pursuant to 8 CFR 205.1(c) where he

intends to engage in his professional field in the United States upon obtaining

an advanced degree In that field.

This case comes forward on appeal from the decision of the District

Director, San Francisco, who on August 10, 1967, denied the request

for revalidation of petition previously approved for preference classi-

fication under section 203 (a) (B• of the Immigration and Nationality

Act on the ground that the petitioner no longer intended to engagt,

in the occupation of engineer for which the petition had originally

been approved.

The petition for preference classification under section 203(a) (d)

of the Act was originally filed on December 9, 1966 by the petitioner

in. his own behalf on the basis of his occupation as an "engineer". He

presented evidence of four years study at the Budapest Politechnical

University in the field of engineering and the award of an "Engi-

neer's Diploma" on October 26, 1944 and evidence of employment as

a consulting engineer on a contract 'basis in. the field of civil and

electrical engineering for the period from 1958 to 1964 in Brazil,

South America.

The Service found his occupation ,to .be that of a civil engineer.

When the petition was originally filed on December 9, 1966, it was

accompanied by Form ES-575A, "Statement - of Qualifications of

Alien", and pursuant to section 212(a)(11) of the Act bore the certi-

fication of the Secretary of Labor dated June 10, 1966.

-

8 CFR 204.4 provides: "The approval of a petition to classify an

alien as a preference immigrant under section 203(a) (3) or (6) of the

Act shall remain valid for a period of one year from the date of any

765

Interim Decision #1873

individual certification issued by the Secretary of Labor pursuant to

section 212 (a) (14) of the Act; if a blanket certification has been issued.

covering the alien's profession. or occupation, the approval shell remain

valid for a period of one year from the date of approval."

At the time the petition was filed and the certification was issued by

the Secretary of Labor, the occupation of "civil engineer" was not

contained in the list of occupations under Group U, Schedule A of

29 CFR 60 for which the Department of Labor had granted a "blanket"

certification and an individual certification as obtained was required.

The petition was thereafter approved on April 10, 1967, with validity

of the approval to expire on June 10, 1967, one year from the Secre-

tary of Labor's certification. The petitioner now seeks revalidation

of the petition. (Effective as of December 23, 1966 the Department of

Labor (31 Fed. Reg. 16412) added the occupation of civil engineer

to their list of occupations in 29 CFR 60, supra.)

8 CFR 205.1(c) provides for the revalidation of a petition previ-

ously approved for classification of preference under section 203 (a) (3)

of the Act if the petitioner/beneficiary is currently eligible for the

classification.

The District Director in his denial of the request for revalidation

states:

The petition was approved for third preference classification on the basis of

your statements in the petition that you are an engineer by profession and in-

tend to engage in that profession in the United States, and documentary evi-

dence submitted to establish your professional qualifications as an engineer. You

have now informed this office in writing, under date of July 31, 1967, that you

Intend to engage in the occupation of management consultant and investment

banker in the United States. Since this is not the profession or occupation for

which the petition was approved, the petition may not be revalidated.

()n appeal petitioner stated in part:

I am an Engineer and my Third Preference claim is based on this professional

status. This is backed by my Engineer's Diploma and fourteen years of profes-

sional activity in engineering.

It is my endeavor to reenter the activity of engineering in the U.S. after a

thorough up-dating of my knowledge and capability for which purpose I have

sought and obtained admittance as a Graduate Student at Stanford University.

Since I am married and have three children, eventual assistantship or scholar-

ship funds appear insufficient for my subsistence during the time required to

obtain my advanced degree. This is the only reason for which I envision the

investment banking profession, which may be exercised by me on a part-time

basis during this period, thus enabling me to provide for my own and my

family's subsistence.

The petitioner intends to follow the engineering profession. He still

has the academic preparation and experience qualifications on which

his original petition was approved. He now wants to do graduate work

766

1111.4711111 1.1CIAOLV11 1CP

at Stanford University to advance his engineering knowledge and to

improve himself in the engineering field. While attending graduate

school he still must support himself and family and will seek tem-

porary employment as a management consultant and investment

broker. His intention to continue in the engineering field is established

by the fact that he has presented a, letter from the Office of Graduate

Admission, Stanford University, dated April 12, 1967 showing admis-

sion to the Graduate Division for work in the Department of Electrical

Engineering for the fall term of 1967 for work towards a Master's

degree. It should be noted that this letter from the University is dated

April 12, 1967 which was before his request for revalidation dated

July 31, 1967 and before the date of the District Director's denial on

August 10, 1967.

In the Hatter of Et , Int. Dec. No. 1627, it is stated : "The phrase 'for

—

purpose of performing' in section 212 (a) (14) clearly indicates that an

immigrant alien within the contemplation of section 212(a) (14) must

establish a bona fide intention to engage immediately or in the foresee-

able future in his profession or a related field."; and "Since an appli-

cant for a visa under section 203 (a.) (3) may be a member of a profes-

sion for which a license, or even citizenship, may be a prerequisite

before he may engage in his professional endeavor, we do not read into

the statutes or regulations a requirement that the applicant must be

able to engage in the qualifying profession immediately, if admitted to

the United States. It is sufficient if he can show a bona fide purpose or

intent to work in the United States in his qualifying endeavor. In deter-

mining whether the alien intends to engage in his profession or in a

field related thereto, consideration may be given to factors suoh as

whether he is presently so employed and, if not, the length of time he

has not been so employed and the reason therefor. Consideration may

also be given to the alien's own declaration regarding his intended

employment."

His intention to engage in the field of his academic preparation has

been established. He was originally found qualified as a civil engineer

on the basis of his undergraduate work and experience in civil and elec-

trical engineering. Electrical engineering is certainly in a, field related

to civil engineering. Both civil engineering and electrical engineering

are occupations listed in Group II, Schedule A of 29 CFR 60 and cov-

ered by the blanket certification of the Secretary of Labor. Considering

all the facts in the case, it must be found that the petitioner is eligible

for the revalidation of his previously approved petition. The appeal

will be sustained.

ORDER : It is ordered that the appeal be sustained and revalidation

granted.

767