George

Hi Everybody,

My L1 was denied by the INS solely because the Lawyer failed to
prepare a good documents proofing that our Parent company and our US
company are having a qualified relation as per the INS rules.

The Parent company is owned 24% myself, 25% my partner and a 51% owned
by a Local sponsor as required by the Law in the country were our
parent company operate. (The real ownership is only me and my partner,
but on the legal docs. only shares mentioned above are listed and
shown)

The USA entity is owned 50% by me and 50% by my partner. The USA
entity was established back in 1996 and was active all over these
years (We provied INS with Bank statements and invoice + import/export
Docs. and AWBs for the US company and the parent company). I'm talking
here about 2 companies that are really in good standing and are
involved in trading with each other and with other customers/clients
around the world even though I'm not talking about a multi-million
dollars business. Our sales turnover is around US$ 1Million per year.

After consulting some people on the issue I was advised to sell and
transfer the units of membership of our US entity from our names (me
and my partner) to the parent company. In this step the parent company
will have a 100% ownership of the US entity. After doing this we'll
re-file the case with the INS paying again a fee of $1130.00 (Premium
processing).

My question is what would be our chance in having the case approved
this time after adding the new membership certificate (Showing that
parent company is 100% owner of US entity)and re-filling the petition
with the INS??

Can the INS comes with a new reason to deny the case or can they
refuse the new evidence added to the case??

Our case is being re-filled with the CSC Premium Processing.

Any help and advise would be highly appreciated...

George

Ingo Pakleppa

On Tue, 04 Mar 2003 23:46:43 +0000, George wrote:

    > Hi Everybody,
    >
    > My L1 was denied by the INS solely because the Lawyer failed to
    > prepare a good documents proofing that our Parent company and our US
    > company are having a qualified relation as per the INS rules.
    >
    > The Parent company is owned 24% myself, 25% my partner and a 51% owned
    > by a Local sponsor as required by the Law in the country were our
    > parent company operate. (The real ownership is only me and my partner,
    > but on the legal docs. only shares mentioned above are listed and
    > shown)
    >
    > The USA entity is owned 50% by me and 50% by my partner. The USA
    > entity was established back in 1996 and was active all over these
    > years (We provied INS with Bank statements and invoice + import/export
    > Docs. and AWBs for the US company and the parent company). I'm talking
    > here about 2 companies that are really in good standing and are
    > involved in trading with each other and with other customers/clients
    > around the world even though I'm not talking about a multi-million
    > dollars business. Our sales turnover is around US$ 1Million per year.
    >
    > After consulting some people on the issue I was advised to sell and
    > transfer the units of membership of our US entity from our names (me
    > and my partner) to the parent company. In this step the parent company
    > will have a 100% ownership of the US entity. After doing this we'll
    > re-file the case with the INS paying again a fee of $1130.00 (Premium
    > processing).
    >
    > My question is what would be our chance in having the case approved
    > this time after adding the new membership certificate (Showing that
    > parent company is 100% owner of US entity)and re-filling the petition
    > with the INS??
    >
    > Can the INS comes with a new reason to deny the case or can they
    > refuse the new evidence added to the case??

Of course INS can always come up with more reasons to deny the case.
Whether they will, is a different question.

It sounds, though, as if the two companies really are independent in the
INS eyes and just happen to have the same owner. Selling your shares to
the parent will solve that problem, but as far as I recall, that
relationship has to exist for a certain period of time before you can use
it (I'm not sure about that).