Usually not on its own. Knowledge of a commercially available system, taught by its manufacturer and available to any purchaser’s staff, is industry skill rather than knowledge special to your employer. What can qualify is the company’s own application of that system: recipes, tolerances and procedures your organization developed and does not publish.
Vendor training points the wrong way
Ask a blunt question before filing: could a competitor buy the same machine, send someone on the same course, and obtain the same capability. If the answer is yes, the certificate you were about to attach is evidence against the petition. Hypothetical example: a colour-matching technologist at a Saint-Cyrille-de-Wendover coatings plant is expert in a widely licensed spectrophotometry suite and holds three certificates from its vendor; his genuinely company-specific asset is different — the internal formula library and the correction rules the plant developed over eleven years to hit customer colour standards on textured substrates.
That is what the petition should describe. Reframing of this kind is legitimate only if it is true, so test it against documents: does an internal standard exist, who wrote it, when was it revised, and is it treated as confidential. Where nothing internal exists, the honest conclusion may be that this beneficiary does not fit the classification, and that a managerial route, a different beneficiary or a local hire is the better plan.