Bob

Make a introductory post about who you are perhaps might be a good start, that'd be your third post

ALBRUZ

NO PROBLEM PM ME

Alan

usadvisors

Excellent idea! We are a FINRA registered investment advisory firm (CRD #157403) that does risk analysis and due diligence on EB-5 projects for foreign clients. We are not agents,"finders" or promote Centers or projects and don't accept commissions from them, but are a team of independent analysts seeking to verify the claims made by the RC developers. We have been a source of information for the NY Times, Bloomberg, WSJ and many other financial publications and my previous background was with Citicorp Capital Markets. Our goal is to help our clients achieve both their immigration and investment objectives.

ALBRUZ

Hi Everybody please find e-mail response from Amlife from Henry Libeman who does not appear very impressed with the USCIS as Amlife are now a $600.000,000 dolar company most of it based on EB-5 investments. Any failure to achieve I-829 approval will massively affect their future plans and very impresive past record

Hopefully all will go ok and just glad that I invested with Amlife who will not take this lying down


Regards

Alan

Quotation


"Alan, were on it. Were preparing a response for all attorneys to use. The first issue is they are applying newly made up rules retroactively. They seem to think the building is empty which is far from the case. I don’t think USCIS has the right to chose an employment methodology. The regs say one can use any “reasonable methodology” . Weve been using the same methodology since 2003 along with a lot of other regional centers. It was reasonable for 9 years. What changed? I could go on and on. Were on the case. Henry"

ALBRUZ

Please see further e-mail from me and Amlife in response to Henrys first e-mail

My E-mail

Hi Henry,
many thanks your e-mail below and I am glad to hear that Amlife is taking this seriously and preparing a suitable response as this is obiously a worrying development after the project seemed to be progressing according to the original plan submitted to the USCIS

Hopefully the problems can be resolved within a reasonable time span

Many thanks for the continuing support of Amlife


Regards

Alan


Henry from Amlife response


"I hope so too. This is crazy, its not like we went off half cocked. They explicitly approved our employment methodology when they approved the regional center. Henry"

ian-mstm

Of course, you had Henry's permission to post his response in a public forum, right?

Ian

S Folinsky

There is now a plethora of RFE's from the minions of the Dark Forces challenging the use of "tenant occupancy methodology" for computing indirect job creation. This is really new.

ALBRUZ

Thanks to everybody for your support I will be returning baxck to my vessel in Brazil tomorriow so will not have any internet availability until my return in 5 weeks time. The latest is that it will be 30-45 days before the RFE response is ready for submitting to the USCIS

I will post more on my return

Best wishes and good luck to you all

Alan

Sue

Yep, I agree with Ian. ALBRUZ have you had permission to post a private response on a public forum?

S Folinsky

The lawyer client privilege is owned by the client, not the lawyer. Lawyers are often taught to remember that.

ravidxb

Hi,
I am also an investor with Amlife but in a different project. When I had discussed with my attorney, he said that if at the time of I 924 approval, the USCIS states that it is indirect empployment, then they can not ask for proof of creation of employment at the stage of I 829. If you read the letter issued by USCIS to Amlife while approving the project, you will find word stating "in case of indirect employment, you need not show proof". in my opinion, the RFE is a procedural aspect and Amlife people must be able to give evidence of completion of the project (as was approved) and get your approval. You will also see in your agreement that the employment is to be equally distributed between the partners anc is not on a first come first serve basis.
If you can send me your RFE, it might give me more insight.

cranston

Albruz says he is away for 5 weeks.

I am an investor in the same project. I have seen Albruz's RFE but in his absence I am not going to post anything.

If I get my own RFE before Albruz's return I will forward a copy to you or anyone who's interested.

Sorry for not adding much to the conversation.

411

I thought this link may help. When I met with Henry earlier this year he sounded positive about his projects although he made recommendations on which one of his investments he felt was suitable for me. I think that Seattle was one of them because it was loan based and as such the initial investment was somewhat guaranteed.
http://blog.lucidtext.com/2012/05/01...on-engagement/

Steve_

Do you think this might be a result of them putting more staff on EB-5 stuff as they were trying to promote it?

Like I said it would be a bit of a perverse outcome if it had had the opposite effect!

411

I dont think thats the reason. The tenancy occupancy methodology, which is where, when a project is completed, it is leased out, and for each lease or something they attribute it to a job created, is an interesting concept. Even as a lay person I have had difficulty accepting that I would have indeed created jobs if I were to buy a strip mall but the fact is visas have been granted for such purposes. The problem is that economists are now waking up to the fact that such tenants may have just moved offices to the new location so that a new job was never created. The argument from RCs is that their projects have already been pre-approved so they really have no right to pull the plug at the 11th hour. My guess is that if Amlife can prove that each new tenant is not relocating they will be fine. However as tempting as it may be, I personally would not put a business plan that would involve purchasing or building offices then leasing it out and expect a visa from it even though there is good chance I would get it (3years ago)