Xterra Solutions, a mid-sized IT consulting company in San Jose, has filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California after U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) refused to approve an H-1B petition for 28-year-old Indian systems analyst Praharsh Chandra Sai Venkata Anisetty. The complaint, lodged on October 25, 2025, accuses USCIS of abusing its discretion by finding that the role was not a bona-fide "specialty occupation" even though the company submitted evidence of complex enterprise-resource-planning duties that require at least a bachelor’s degree in information systems.
The lawsuit is emblematic of a broader spike in H-1B litigation during FY 2025. After the Trump administration reinstated a rigorous specialty-occupation memo earlier this year and raised the H-1B filing fee to US$100,000, denial rates that had stabilized under President Biden have climbed back above 20 percent, according to National Foundation for American Policy estimates. Employers say officers are again second-guessing wage levels and issuing boiler-plate Requests for Evidence (RFEs) that ignore detailed expert opinions.
For companies, the immediate stakes are clear. Anisetty was slated to lead a US$4 million SAP migration next quarter; without an injunction, the project could be delayed or shifted overseas. More broadly, continued unpredictability undermines workforce planning and could push startups toward Canada’s Global Talent Stream or the UK’s new Innovator Founder route.
Immigration attorneys note that the complaint revives arguments that succeeded during Trump’s first term: that USCIS misreads the Occupational Outlook Handbook and applies an impermissibly narrow interpretation of "normally" when assessing degree requirements. They expect a settlement or remand within six months, but warn that a flood of similar suits could overwhelm federal dockets and force policymakers to revisit the specialty-occupation definition legislatively.
In the meantime, mobility teams should build contingency plans. Options include filing cap-exempt H-1Bs through a university partnership, reclassifying roles under less scrutinized codes, or starting a PERM green-card process sooner to hedge against future denials.
The lawsuit is emblematic of a broader spike in H-1B litigation during FY 2025. After the Trump administration reinstated a rigorous specialty-occupation memo earlier this year and raised the H-1B filing fee to US$100,000, denial rates that had stabilized under President Biden have climbed back above 20 percent, according to National Foundation for American Policy estimates. Employers say officers are again second-guessing wage levels and issuing boiler-plate Requests for Evidence (RFEs) that ignore detailed expert opinions.
For companies, the immediate stakes are clear. Anisetty was slated to lead a US$4 million SAP migration next quarter; without an injunction, the project could be delayed or shifted overseas. More broadly, continued unpredictability undermines workforce planning and could push startups toward Canada’s Global Talent Stream or the UK’s new Innovator Founder route.
Immigration attorneys note that the complaint revives arguments that succeeded during Trump’s first term: that USCIS misreads the Occupational Outlook Handbook and applies an impermissibly narrow interpretation of "normally" when assessing degree requirements. They expect a settlement or remand within six months, but warn that a flood of similar suits could overwhelm federal dockets and force policymakers to revisit the specialty-occupation definition legislatively.
In the meantime, mobility teams should build contingency plans. Options include filing cap-exempt H-1Bs through a university partnership, reclassifying roles under less scrutinized codes, or starting a PERM green-card process sooner to hedge against future denials.
