You are hereEB-5-related issues for Project Companies, EB-5 clients, Regional Centers and wanna-be Regional Centers / For Everyone Interested in EB-5 Program / [HOT] Why can't USCIS set up a similar adjudication procedure for Regional Centers as the one for a patent application?

[HOT] Why can't USCIS set up a similar adjudication procedure for Regional Centers as the one for a patent application?

An experienced EB-5 practitioner informed me that he recently met a patent office examiner, and the examiner described to him how they process a patent application. Upon receipt, the patent office examiners email the applicant their name and contact info, they then have a call to discuss the case and the issues, they work to resolve the matter via email, phone and etc. Total engagement, effective two-way communications. The same experienced EB-5 practitioner practicing in Wash. D.C. then wondered why can't USCIS set up a similar adjudication procedure at least for regional center designation application, including I-924 amendment and pre-approval application?

Well, why can't USCIS really do this? A regional center designation application procedure is very much like a patent application with a patent office in that the applicant is applying for a license to make use of the patent or regional center designation for business purpose or profit, and the right accrues to the applicant, while promoting U.S. economy or business. Why can't USCIS think outside the confines of what it has always done? Are there external forces that prohibit USCIS from doing the same, such as shortage of funds? I tend to think that the true obstacle lies in the USCIS mentality of mistrust.

Even without treading outside the traditional confines of USCIS adjudicative procedures, USCIS examiners are allowed to do personal interviews, and I have no idea why examiners would not want to interview the Regional Center applicants with their attorneys or representatives, aside from their not wanting to meet immigration attorneys, each of whom are super nice human beings. :) It would save USCIS and attorneys a lot of time, make better decisions and truly help U.S. businesses proceed with projects that would create jobs. If a lack of funds is the reason, charge additional fees to conduct person-to-person interviews.

I would think this sort of procedural change would not take too much time to implement, and USCIS would come out looking like a great innovator and helper of U.S. businesses. Am I too practical or idealistic to think that this kind of change is possible?