AILA’s Advocacy Action Center allows you to advocate for legislative and policy reforms consistent with AILA’s principles and priorities.
Get InvolvedThe brand-new 18th edition of Kurzban's Immigration Law Sourcebook is now shipping.
Order NowLearn how to tackle challenges like finding and retaining affordable staff, working better in a hybrid or remote environment, when and how to raise fees, and much more.
Register NowAILALink puts an entire immigration law library at your fingertips! Search the AILALink database for all your practice needs—statutes, regs, case law, agency guidance, publications, and more.
AILA Doc. No. 22111004 | Dated November 9, 2022 | File Size: 947 K
Download the DocumentAILA sent a letter to the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program Office requesting urgent clarification and policy guidance related to legal requirements of previously approved regional centers electing to wind-down pursuant to the settlement agreement issued in the Behring Regional Center LLC, et al. v. Mayorkas litigation.
On January 23, 2023, USCIS responded to AILA’s letter stating that, “we are evaluating potential solutions that will address the issue of regional center investors’ status in the event that the regional center elects not to file the Form I-956 amendment…. USCIS is actively developing regulations pursuant to the statute.”
On February 9, 2023, USCIS further responded, posting to the March 20, 2023, EB-5 stakeholder engagement. The letter states that, “we anticipate posting responses to frequently asked questions and I-956 form overviews to the USCIS website in the near future.”
[[To print the PDF on this page please use the print function in the PDF reader.]]
Cite as AILA Doc. No. 22111004.
Open the DocumentAmerican Immigration Lawyers Association
1331 G Street NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20005
Copyright © 1993-
American Immigration Lawyers Association.
AILA.org should not be relied upon as the exclusive source for your legal research. Nothing on AILA.org constitutes legal advice, and information on AILA.org is not a substitute for independent legal advice based on a thorough review and analysis of the facts of each individual case, and independent research based on statutory and regulatory authorities, case law, policy guidance, and for procedural issues, federal government websites.