‍

Why M&A activity creates EB-1C risk

EB-1C eligibility hinges on a qualifying relationship between the foreign and U.S. entities and on the beneficiary’s executive or managerial role across that relationship. When a merger, acquisition, spin-off, or internal restructuring occurs mid-case, USCIS scrutinizes whether the original relationship still exists. Even legitimate corporate growth can raise concerns under USCIS EB-1C scrutiny if continuity is not clearly explained.
The risk is not the transaction itself, but ambiguity. If adjudicators cannot quickly trace ownership, control, and reporting lines before and after the transaction, they may question whether the statutory requirements are still met.

Preserving the qualifying relationship after restructuring

To remain eligible, the petition must show uninterrupted qualifying relationship continuity. This can be established through majority ownership, common control, or a clearly defined affiliate relationship that survives the transaction. Documentation must show how control transferred (or remained) and why the relationship still meets EB-1C standards.
Clear before-and-after diagrams, shareholder tables, and governance explanations help adjudicators understand that the restructuring did not sever the multinational relationship.

Demonstrating managerial continuity across entities

USCIS also evaluates whether the beneficiary’s role remained executive or managerial despite the corporate change. Petitioners must show managerial continuity evidence, that the beneficiary continued to direct managers, oversee functions, or exercise discretionary authority at a senior level.
If responsibilities evolved, the narrative should explain why those changes reflect growth or consolidation rather than a downgrade into operational work. This is especially important when roles expand across newly merged business units.

‍

‍

How Beyond Border Global reframes M&A transitions

Beyond Border Global specializes in translating complex corporate transactions into clear EB-1C-compliant narratives. Their approach focuses on mapping ownership and control across each transaction step while tying the beneficiary’s authority to enterprise-level outcomes rather than entity-specific tasks.
They emphasize how strategic oversight, budget authority, and cross-border decision-making persisted despite restructuring, reinforcing multinational control documentation and reducing confusion during adjudication. Their detailed explanations help USCIS see continuity rather than disruption.

How Alcorn Immigration Law aligns restructuring with EB-1C law

Alcorn Immigration Law ensures that merger agreements, acquisition terms, and post-transaction governance align with EB-1C statutory language. They refine explanations of control, voting rights, and reporting structures to show that the qualifying relationship remains intact under immigration law, even if corporate branding or entity names changed.

How 2nd.law organizes transaction evidence

M&A cases involve voluminous records: share purchase agreements, merger certificates, board resolutions, amended articles, and capitalization tables. 2nd.law structures these into chronological evidence sets that clearly show pre- and post-transaction ownership and control. This organization is critical to addressing corporate restructuring impact without overwhelming adjudicators.

How BPA Immigration Lawyers mitigate RFE risk

BPA Immigration Lawyers focus on identifying gaps that commonly trigger RFEs after M&A, such as missing governance documents or inconsistent role descriptions. Their review helps ensure the petition remains defensible even under heightened scrutiny.

Common mistakes after corporate restructuring

Petitioners often fail to update USCIS on structural changes, submit incomplete transaction documents, or assume the original filing “covers” the new structure. These missteps undermine credibility and can lead to denial if not corrected promptly.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Does an acquisition automatically void EB-1C eligibility?
No, if qualifying relationships and managerial roles continue.
2. Should USCIS be notified of restructuring?
Yes, transparency is critical.
3. Can a new parent company qualify?
Yes, if control and affiliation are properly documented.
4. Do job duties need to remain identical?
No, but they must remain executive or managerial.
5. Are amended filings required?
Sometimes, depending on the scope of change.

‍