Investor Immigration Case Results

The matters on this page are actual Messersmith Law Firm matters that were previously published as case reports on INA212.com, another legal resource published by the firm.

This page intentionally does not reproduce identifying client information. The summaries focus on the immigration category, the government issue, the procedural response, and the reported outcome.

In an actual Messersmith Law Firm matter, a Canadian entrepreneur applying for an E-2 treaty investor visa in Toronto received a refusal under INA §214(b).

The matter proceeded to a follow-up interview. According to the firm's published case report, the E-2 visa was then approved.

This result does not establish that another refusal can or will be reversed. A refusal must be analyzed according to the actual ground, the record before the consular post, the E-2 eligibility evidence, and any later procedural opportunity provided by the government.

Read the original Messersmith case report

In another actual Messersmith Law Firm matter, an E-2 applicant had a shoplifting record from approximately fifteen years earlier that required inadmissibility and waiver analysis.

According to the firm's published case report, an INA §212(d)(3) nonimmigrant waiver was approved and the E-2 visa was issued.

The age or type of a prior offense does not by itself determine whether another applicant is admissible or whether a waiver should be granted. The legal ground, underlying record, current circumstances, visa eligibility, discretionary factors, and government review all matter.

Read the original Messersmith case report

A reported approval is most useful when the reader can understand the problem that existed before the favorable outcome. In the first matter, the relevant procedural fact was an E-2 visa refusal followed by another interview. In the second, the E-2 application intersected with a separate inadmissibility and nonimmigrant waiver issue.

Neither example means that a similar fact pattern will produce the same result. The value of the examples is that they illustrate why a prior refusal, criminal record, waiver issue, or inconsistent immigration history should be identified before an investor visa strategy is finalized.

Review investor immigration problem cases and government issues

An E-2 applicant must independently satisfy the treaty investor requirements. A successful response to a refusal or approval of a separate waiver does not replace the need to establish treaty nationality, qualifying investment, commercial risk, substantiality, a real and operating enterprise, nonmarginality, and the investor's ability to develop and direct the business.

The legal and factual record should therefore be evaluated as a whole rather than treating a prior case result as a substitute for the governing E-2 requirements.

Review the E-2 treaty investor authority guide

This page is intended to document representative legal work without publishing identifying client information. The descriptions are therefore limited to facts already published by the firm that are necessary to understand the immigration issue and reported outcome.

The absence of additional details should not be interpreted as meaning that those facts were irrelevant. Immigration cases often turn on records and circumstances that cannot be captured in a short public summary.

A person dealing with an E-2 refusal, inadmissibility issue, prior criminal matter, or other visa problem should have the actual government record and current facts reviewed. The legal question is not whether another client once obtained a favorable result, but whether the present applicant can satisfy the governing law and address the specific issue in the current record.

Request an individual investor immigration consultation