Legal Opinion
WALSH AND POLLARD
Board of Immigration Appeals
Decided July 1, 1989No. ID 3111PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Interim Decision #3111 MATTER OF WALSH and POLLARD In Exclusion Proceedings A-26491503 A-26491504 Decided by Board February 26, 1988 (1) A foreign corporation must have invested or be actively in the process of investing a substantial amount of capital in order to qualify as a treaty investor under section 101(a)(15)(E) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § I101(a)(15)(E) (1.982). (2) Under the treaty investor criteria, no particular dollar amount is required for an investment to be deemed substantial; however, the investment must be in a bona fide business and, in the case of a…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Griggs v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Morton v. RuizSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- United States v. LarionoffSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- United States v. Pierce Auto Freight Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Nathaniel Flores Pazcoguin v. Donald A. Radcliffe, District Director Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Nathaniel Flores Pazcoguin v. Donald A. Radcliffe, District Director Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Itserve Alliance, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2022