No universal exclusivity rule decides the case. Assess the actual special or advanced knowledge and proposed work under the proper standard.
Avoid unsupported comparisons
Do not exaggerate differences between colleagues merely to make the applicant appear irreplaceable.
The regulation defines specialized knowledge by reference to the petitioning organization: its product, service, research, equipment, techniques, management or other interests, or an advanced level of knowledge of its processes and procedures. Useful records may include the employee’s foreign assignments, internal training history, process materials, product versions handled, authored troubleshooting notes, and examples showing advanced familiarity with company procedures. Where training evidence helps is on the first question: if the company's own records show that a competent industrial technologist takes eighteen months of internal work before being trusted to requalify a formulation, that is direct evidence the knowledge is advanced and company-specific. General technical skill, a hard-to-fill position, or a claim that the employee is difficult to replace does not, without more, meet the applicable standard, and the qualifying foreign employment and corporate relationship remain separate requirements that still need their own evidence.