Big H-1B Defeat for USCIS: RELX v. Baran

RELX (LexisNexis) v. Baran

"In short, the LexisNexis position was a distinct occupation
which required a specialized course of study, notwithstanding
the fact that the study included several specialized fields. Ms.
Chatterjee completed that specialized course of study in the
relevant fields and LexisNexis has employed her exactly because
she has the specialized skills to perform the duties of the
position and requisite educational requirements. The mountain of
evidence submitted by LexisNexis to support the petition more
than meets the preponderance of the evidence standard. The
agency’s decision was not “based on a consideration of the
relevant factors” and was “a clear error of judgment.” See
Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 416
(1971). USCIS acted arbitrarily, capriciously, and abused its
discretion in denying employer's petition for H–1B visa status
on behalf of Ms. Chatterjee. Accordingly, the plaintiffs’ motion
for summary judgment is GRANTED. ...

For the foregoing reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss is
DENIED and plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.
Accordingly, the defendants shall grant plaintiffs’ petition and
is FURTHER ORDERED to change Ms. Chatterjee's status to H–1B
nonimmigrant. An appropriate Order accompanies this Memorandum
Opinion."

[Hats off to Denyse Sabagh and Michael Schrier!]