No. Skill with software available on the market is general knowledge. L-1B requires specialized knowledge of the company's own product, process or procedures, such as a workflow, rule set or calibration routine the firm developed itself.
The firm's own workflow, not the vendor's software
Hypothetical example: the New Maryland specialist is expert in a widely used point-cloud processing package and also built the firm's proprietary classification rule sets and quality-control scripts on top of it. Only the second part supports L-1B. The petition should describe the firm's own workflow, show the internal documents that record it, and explain why the U.S.
corridor-mapping contract requires it, while leaving vendor-software skill as background. Reviewers compare the claimed knowledge with what a competent analyst could learn from public sources; a workflow documented only inside the firm passes that comparison, a software certification does not. The specialist also needs one continuous year of qualifying employment abroad within the past three years, the two firms must be related and operating, and the knowledge should have been gained during that employment.
L-1B time is limited to five years. A first review should identify the precise company-specific knowledge, where it is recorded, who else holds it, and why it matters to the U.S. assignment.
Employment records settle the qualifying time abroad; controlled manuals, development histories, and witness explanations may settle the knowledge question. Hypothetical example: a prosthetics manufacturer wants to move the technician who created a custom socket-fitting calibration process. The reviewer compares public training materials with the internal calibration logs and asks how many workers can reproduce the process without that technician.
The result is a claim grounded in particular knowledge rather than a broad statement that the worker is highly skilled.