Yes, if the knowledge attaches to what the organization built or configured rather than to the vendor's product. The petition has to make that distinction explicitly.
Draw the line and defend the right side of it
Expertise in a licensed product is recruitable, and a petition resting on it invites the observation that certified administrators are available locally. The defensible position is the organization's own layer: the schema it designed, the business rules encoded into the integration, the workarounds developed for its own operating conditions, and the reasoning behind choices that are not written down anywhere. Describing that layer as a distinct artifact, with a history of who built it and why, changes the character of the claim. The same discipline helps the receiving side, because implementing it at the affiliate is then a defined project rather than general systems support, which also makes the duty description in the petition more concrete.
Hypothetical example: A medical-device sterilization company proposes to transfer the employee who designed its internal batch-release workflow. The first review should identify the organization-specific methods, the person’s training history, and the receiving project that needs that knowledge. Controlled manuals, training logs, and version history settle the claim better than a title. The foreign employment must include one continuous qualifying year during the preceding three years, and prior L time must be counted because specialized-knowledge status is limited to five years in the aggregate.
The company should calculate the remaining period before making a commitment the classification cannot cover.