Second Attempt for L-1 Multinational Manager Approved After 1 Week

Second Attempt for L-1 Multinational Manager Approved After 1 Week

Year: 2018
Nationality: Chinese
Beneficiaries. Mr. Han
Company Industry. High-tech entrepreneurship and venture capital
Company Overview. Established in early 2016, in start-up mode, 6 employees
Beneficiary Position. Managing Partner of the firm
Case. L-1A reapplication after initial petition denial

– L-1A first petition was denied just a few months ago.
– The company’s business is high-tech and venture capital, which is a very complex industry for the immigration authorities, and as a layman, reviewing file may be difficult to understand when reviewing the file.
– The ownership structure of the company is also extremely complex, with the California company that filed the L-1A petition for Mr. Han being only a small branch of the Chinese parent company.
– Being a start-up venture capital firm that has been running at a significant loss.
– Mr. Han had just completed one year of employment with the Chinese parent company and the INS questioned Mr. Han’s work history.

No law firm can decide which immigration officer will hear the case they file, but a clear and logical argument can lead to a successful and difficult case even if the first petition is denied. Such issues. Mr. Han was previously the managing partner of the Chinese parent company, which specializes in venture capital investments in technology startups; the U.S. subsidiary is a California-based investment firm that is in its infancy but growing well. Therefore, we were confident that our L-1 application would be successful. However, two weeks after the petition was filed, we received an RFE (Remediation Notice).

After carefully reading the supplemental notice, we were puzzled by the fact that the additional information requested by USCIS had already been included in detail in the first application. Despite the fact that Zandikai’s team had already submitted nearly 60 attachments that fully explained the beneficiary’s role in the Chinese company and the U.S. company, the ownership relationship between the two companies, and the business plan with high potential for growth, and emphasized the difference between the organizational structure of a venture capital company and that of a traditional company, the immigration officer asked for another explanation of Mr. Han’s role and responsibilities in the Chinese company and the U.S. company. The immigration officer again asked for an explanation of Mr. Han’s role and job responsibilities in both the Chinese and U.S. companies.

In response to the notice of filing request, Tsang & Associates filed 25 new filings documents, such as a new letter of incorporation, an improved organizational chart, more detailed payroll and financial documents and investment contracts, work reports, and project documents to support Mr. Han’s job duties. documents etc. However, under Trump’s high-handed immigration policy, some conservative immigration officers still use insufficient evidence and do not qualify as “corporate officers” to deny his application.

However, we still did not give up. Based on our experience accumulated in 34 years of handling numerous difficult and miscellaneous cases, Mr. Zang Dikai firmly believed that this case was worthy of a second application. After listening to Mr. Zang’s professional analysis, Mr. Han chose to trust us and make a second attempt. Thus, Tsang & Associates filed a second application for Mr. Han in June 2018 documents In June 2018, Tsang & Associates filed a second application for Mr. Han, opting for accelerated processing. As expected, we received an approval letter from the USCIS a week later, without any additional documents, and a single approval for three years, without any extension after the first year.

Key point 1: Everything is fine and perfect
After the initial and supplemental filings, Tsang & Associates has substantial and sufficient documentation materials available to demonstrate Mr. Han’s management responsibilities in both the Chinese and U.S. companies, as well as the strong ties between the Chinese and U.S. companies. Although the previous notice of filing did not question the ownership structure of the company, we filed more than a dozen documents that describe and explain the complex ownership structure between several layers of companies, seeking to Documentation The documents were so detailed and thoughtful that USCIS could not find any flaws. Not only that, but we also highlighted the consequences of the denial of the case, and its seriousness, in our secondary application materials. A decisive factor in the venture capital firm’s ability to execute its business plan to the next level was the presence of an experienced executive to manage and coordinate between the headquarters and the branch.

We screened the data from the initial submission and retroactive submissions against the new ones provided by the MidAmerica file combined with the new files provided by MidAmerica. In the end, our second filing totaled nearly 90 attachments. Normally, an initial L-1 petition does not have more than 50 attachments. However, under today’s high pressure and stringent policies, Tsang & Associates went above and beyond to include all files to ensure that each requirement of the L-1 petition is fully addressed in the submission.

Key point 2: Analyze the causes and prescribe the right medicine
Different immigration officers may interpret the case from different perspectives when reviewing the case. There was an element of bad luck in Mr. Han’s first application, having run into an immigration officer who was conservative and had little exposure to new industries. However, there is no denying that Mr. Han’s case was well-documented and well-argued. Based on years of experience in immigration cases, Tsang & Associates is confident that a strong case like this will not be denied by a new immigration officer in the event of a reapplication.

Nevertheless, we believe that a key reason for the failure of the initial submission was that Mr. Han’s area of expertise, venture capital, may have been too complex for the immigration officer reviewing the case to understand. Therefore, in order to ensure that the new immigration officer could clearly understand Mr. Han’s business and job duties, Zang Dikai’s team conducted an in-depth study from the perspective of the L-1 petition, how to explain in depth the organizational structure, staffing arrangement, job duties of the venture capital company, and why a small company with several people that had been losing money needed to transfer its executives from the immigration officer’s perspective, and reworked the attorney’s letter and the Sino-US company letter in order to Clearly explain the nature of the venture capital firm’s business, how it operates, and the need to send an experienced executive to run the U.S. firm.

Key point 3: Attach a rejection letter that shows the facts
Finally, Tsang & Associates attached the denial letter received with the initial application to file. The reason for submitting this denial letter is to show that the first immigration officer missed many of the supporting documents that were already in place, such as the company’s organizational chart and employee qualifications. It is more important to demonstrate to the new immigration officer that despite having such adequate documents, it is illogical for the previous immigration officer to write the denial letter despite such adequate documentation.

He applied for a second time in June 2018 and received the approval letter from the immigration office a week later without any problems. Mr. Han was very excited to receive the good news! The rejection of his first application had shattered his confidence and he was very worried that his second application would still be blocked and his plans and goals to work in the U.S. would all be lost. As soon as possible after the USCIS approval, we made an appointment for Mr. Han to interview at the consulate in early July and prepare for the interview. documents The visa interview process went very smoothly.

Mr. Han thanked Tsang & Associates for their support and professional services along the way. Whenever he encountered any obstacles in his application, Tsang & Associates was always the first to communicate with him and give him professional analysis and effective advice. Mr. Han said that the meticulous and professional services provided by the Tsang & Associates team made the cooperation between the two parties very pleasant and enabled him to work in the U.S. as he wished.

A failed initial application does not mean that the visa application path is completely blocked; a rejection may be due to an iteration of various factors. Especially with the tightening of immigration policies, it is advisable to consult a professional lawyer for legal assistance if you have any questions related to your application. A professional and experienced law firm will be able to give you a professional analysis of your case and come up with the right solution to minimize your losses or even turn your case over to success. Tsang & Associates has been handling all kinds of difficult cases for 34 years since its establishment in 1984, and we welcome you to contact us anytime.

*To protect customer privacy, customer names are pseudonyms.

Original Content

This is our original content and is based on our real client(s) and their unique story. Please be aware that many of our articles and success stories have been copied by others. If you are seeking a professional for legal services we highly recommend you directly ask the lawyer details about how to win this case and the key strategies involved. We would love to share with you how we did it for others and how we can create a new success story with you.