Zhang v. USCIS is a November 2018 Class Action Lawsuit that challenged USCIS’ denials of EB-5 investment petitions that had investment funds sourced solely from unsecured loans. The EB-5 program, also known as the Million Dollar Green Card, allows investors to obtain a green card if they invest either $800,000 or $1,050,000 in business or projects that will create 10 full time jobs. To learn more about the program, please click here.
The DC District Court ruled in favor of Zhang and vacated these denials and ordered USCIS to reconsider the petitions. Now, based on this decision, USCIS is accepting potential class members who believe that they have received a Form I-526 denial based solely on the ground of unsecured loans to identify themselves to potentially have their case reconsidered.
To contact USCIS, please email USCIS.ImmigrantInvestorProgram@uscis.dhs.gov, using the subject line “Zhang Class,” and provide the following:
- Alien Number (if any)
- Date of birth
- I-526 receipt number (if available)
- Date of I-526 denial
- Copy of I-526 denial (if available)
Please note that successful identification as a potential class member is subject to USCIS verification and decision. This does not guarantee that your case will be reconsidered or that it will be approved. This also does not grant any immediate rights. This decision is also currently under consideration for appeal.
FREE EB-5 Visa Resources
Click on the buttons below in order to claim your free EB-5 Visa Guide, sign up for our free EB-5 Visa Webinar, or watch our EB-5 Visa videos.
Set up an EB-5 Visa Consultation
For a dedicated one-on-one EB-5 Visa consultation with one of our lawyers, click on the button below to schedule your consultation.
This website and blog constitutes attorney advertising. Do not consider anything in this website or blog legal advice and nothing in this website constitutes an attorney-client relationship being formed. Set up a one-hour consultation with us before acting on anything you read here. Past results are no guarantee of future results and prior results do not imply or predict future results. Each case is different and must be judged on its own merits.