Based on an analysis of more than 100,000 legal news articles, legal publisher The National Law Review (NLR) recognized Kristen Walker Ng, an associate in Greenberg Traurig LLP’s Immigration
Continue Reading Greenberg Traurig’s Kristen Walker Ng Honored as 2019 National Law Review ‘Go-To Thought Leader’ on Immigration
As previously blogged (see EB-5 Regulations Published for Public Inspection), the EB-5 regulations have been published as of July 24, 2019, as final, to take effect Nov. 21,
Continue Reading EB-5 Regulations Summary
After years of delay the Obama-era EB-5 immigration regulations were published on July 24, 2019. You can find a copy of the regulations at this link. You can also
Continue Reading New EB-5 Regulations: Winners and Losers
After more than two and a half years, Obama-era EB-5 immigration regulations are set to be published on July 24, 2019, with an effective date 120 days after publication or
Continue Reading EB-5 Regulations Published for Public Inspection
On April 9, 2019, Rep. González-Colón (R-PR-At Large) introduced H.R.2173 – a bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to reserve EB-5 visas each fiscal year for investors in
Continue Reading New Bill Introduced to Use Economic Abilities of EB-5 to Assist Disaster Recovery in Declared National Disaster Areas
Ian R. Macdonald and Kristen W. Ng were recently featured in an article on The LexBlog Network titled, “Third Time’s a Charm? Greenberg Traurig’s Team Breaks down Trump’s Latest
Continue Reading GT’s Ian R. Macdonald and Kristen W. Ng Explain the Latest Travel Ban on The LexBlog Network
By a vote of 235-193, the House passed H.J. Res 123, the Continuing Appropriations Act.
Upon passage, H.J.Res 123 was sent immediately to the Senate, where it passed by
Continue Reading Congress Passes Continuing Resolution Extending EB-5 Program to Dec. 22
On Dec. 4, 2017, the Supreme Court issued an order allowing President Trump’s Proclamation on Travel Ban to go fully into effect. With certain exceptions, this ban places entry restriction on nationals of eight countries – Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. As previously reported, in September a U.S. District Judge in Hawaii blocked the Proclamation from taking effect, except for nationals of North Korea and Venezuela. On Nov. 13, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily put part of the lower court’s ruling on hold, allowing the Proclamation to take effect, but only for those individuals from the impacted countries who do not have bona fide ties to the United States.
Continue Reading Supreme Court Issues Order Allowing Full Implementation of Proclamation
We previously reported on the disturbing Request for Evidence (RFE) trend where investors and their attorneys were not receiving RFEs in the mail even though the case status showed that one was issued. We are now reporting on another trend, this time in the substance of the RFEs and the results from submitting responses, specifically to the RFEs that request additional evidence from third-party money exchangers.
Continue Reading I-526 Practice Tips to Help Avoid RFEs and NOIDs on Third-Party Exchangers
Investors and their attorneys alike have taken note of a disturbing trend recently: when USCIS issues a Request for Evidence (RFE), it is oftentimes not received by either party. Typically, RFEs are mailed in hard copy, and a copy is mailed to the Investor, and a second copy is mailed to the attorney of record. In almost all cases with I-526 RFEs, the Investor is given 87 days to respond if he or she resides in the United States, and 98 days to respond if he or she resides outside of the United States. Recently, upon checking the status of a case using the USCIS online portal, the Investor and/or attorney will find that “A Request for Additional Evidence Has Been Mailed,” on a specific date; however, frequently the RFE is never received by either party, including the attorney of record that should receive a copy of all communications from USCIS. Common protocol is to follow up with USCIS via email, but some have experienced 1) unresponsiveness from USCIS, sometimes taking a several weeks to respond; and 2) the officer responding is unwilling to attach the RFE to the email correspondence without proof the RFE was not delivered, a standard which is impossible to prove given that USCIS mails the RFEs via U.S. Postal Service with no delivery tracking.
Continue Reading I-526 TREND: Delays in Receiving Requests for Evidence