Interim Decision #2876 

MATTER OF LEE 

In Visa Petition Proceedings 

A-CHI-N-20149 

Decided by Regional Commissioner May 8, 1981 

(1) To qualify for nonimmigrant classification as a temporary worker of distinguished 

merit and ability within the meaning of section 101(a)(15)(HXD of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i), a beneficiary must be a member of a profession offered a temporary position performing services which require professional 

skills. 

(2) A beneficiary who is a dentist, offered a position practicing dentistry for an hidefinite period of time with nu opeciiied termination date has not been offered a temporary 

position and .. does not qualify for nonimmigrant classification as a temporary worker 

of distinguished merit and ability within the meaning of section 101(a)(15)(11)(9 of the 

Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(11)(1). 

ON BLIIALF OF PETITIONER: William Newell Siebert, Esquire 

111 E. Wacker Drive, Suite 515 

Chicago, Illinois 60601 

This matter is before me on appeal from the District Director's decision dated March 11, 1981, denying the petition to classify the beneficiary as a temporary worker of distinguished merit and ability (H-1) 

under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 

as amended, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i). The appeal will be dismissed. 

The petitioner is a partner in a professional association of dentists. 

The beneficiary is a 34-year-old native and citizen of Hong Kong who 

last entered the United States on September 2, 1975, as a nonimmigrant 

student. He earned a Doctor of Dental Surgery degree from the Loyola 

University's Chicago College of Dental Surgery on May 27, 197R 

Thereafter, he was granted two periods of authorized practical training 

to June 30, 1979. The petitioner has offered the beneficiary a 40% share 

in the net income of the partnership in exchange for his services as a 

dentist. The petitioner indicated no specific ending date for this 

arrangement. '11,e beneficiary has been working pursuant to these terms 

since March 3, 1979. The visa petition to classify the beneficiary as a 

nonimmigrant temporary worker on the basis of this position as a dentist in a partnership or professional association was filed on June 28, 

1979. 

96 
Interim Decision #2876 

Nonimmigrant classification as temporary worker of distinguished 

merit and ability is granted where the beneficiary L4 a member of the 

professions, the duties to be performed are of an exceptional nature 

requiring a member of the professions, and the services are to be performed for a temporary period of time (Matter of General Atomic Company, 17 I&N Dec. 532 (Comm. 1980). Temporary means "that which is 

to last for a limited time only, as distinguished from that which is 

perpetual, or indefinite, in duration." Black's Law Dictionary (4th Ed. 

1968). 

In the present case the beneficiary is a professional dentist whose 

duties of providing dental care to low-income families require his exceptional abilities. However, the District Director found that his employment is contemplated for a period of indefinite duration, not fixed by 

any set date in the future. On appeal, attorney for the petitioner did not 

satisfactorily refute this conclusion. He indicated that the petitioner is 

presently looking for an American dentist without success. The offer on 

this application is extended only to the point of hiring an American to fill 

the position. I note, however, that the beneficiary has occupied this 

position for more than 2 years now; the petitioner appears to have no 

prospects of filling this position; and the petitioner has not documented 

his efforts to fill the position in support of his claimed intention to only 

employ the beneficiary temporarily. Such circumstances are not indicative of temporary employment. 

I conclude that the petitioner has failed to establish that his intention 

with respect to the employment of the beneficiary is merely for temporary employment. Following Matter of University of Oklahoma, 14 

I&N Dec. 213 (BIA 1972), the petition was properly denied. 

ORDER The appeal is dismissed. 

WI