Author Archives: yongfu
Our client, an International student, is satisfied with the outcome of his criminal case. The case, State of Ohio v. Chen, Case No. 17CRB00347, was prosecuted at the Oberlin Municipal Court. Our client was charged with two first-degree misdemeanors — assault and domestic violence. Such charges, if convicted, would result him to be immediately deported.
A unique fact in this case was that the client admitted the wrong and much more when he was confronted by the police officers. Thus, his admission was the most fatal fact in the case. After motion to suppress and suppression hearing, the court ruled that his admission would not be excluded. The case was scheduled for the trial and we were prepared for going forward.
But in the final pretrial, the prosecution offered a charge that was much less in severity. The Client decided to take the plea bargain. The reduced charge will not affect client’s visa and his stay in the United States. Thus a satisfactory result for the client.
Even though we were prepared for trial, the client must make all important decisions, such as taking or rejecting the plea bargain, as it was in this case. Trial is risky. If defense wins, the client wins all, if defense loses, the consequence could be huge.
If you need a criminal defense attorney, please contact us. The initial consultation is free.
On February 24, 2017, parties settled in the case captioned as Robert Parker et al. v. Erie Insurance et al. Case No. 2016 CV 02780, pending in the Montgomery Common Pleas Court. It is a personal injury case and our firm represented a defendant. Plaintiffs alleged bodily injuries, such as back injuries, from a car accident. We reviewed extensive medical records. After depositions and mediation, parties were able to settle the case before the trial. Our client only needed to pay a nominal amount of money. The client is very satisfied with the result.
Every personal injury case is different. The value of your claim depends on many factors. Some are concrete, such as medical bills and lost wages. Others are harder to determine, such as pain and suffering.
In this area, we represented both Plaintiff and Defendant in the past. When you hire us to pursue your claim, we will go over every detail of your case to make the best possible estimate of how much compensation you should receive for your injuries. In general, relevant factors that determine the amount of a settlement demand include:
- The nature of your injuries
- The extent of your injuries
- What medical treatment you have received and will need in the future
- How much time you lost from work or will lose in the future
- Whether you have suffered emotional distress
- Whether your familial relationships are affected by your injuries
- Whether you have suffered any disability as a result of your injuries
- Whether you have been disfigured by your injuries
- How much evidence to support your claim
- How much insurance is available to compensate you for your injuries
- Whether you shared any responsibility in causing your injuries
Most personal injury cases end with settlement. Thus a lawyer skilled in settlement is critical to your success. If no agreement can be reached, we will proceed with a lawsuit or trial. In either scenario, our vigorous approach will ensure an ultimate success of your claim.
If we represent defendant in a personal injury case, we will try to minimize the damage. Whether prosecuting or defending, we put the same effort to get the best result for you. If you want a competent law firm to handle your injury case, please contact us. The first consultation is free.
On January 23, 2017, an order was delivered in a case captioned as IIP Cleveland Regeneration, LLC, et al. v. Zhenfen Huang, et. al., Case No 1:16 CV 2673, pending in the U.S. District Court for Northern District of Ohio. Our firm represented the defendants in this case. After vigorous defending, the District Court dismissed plaintiffs’ complaint. This results a total and complete victory for our clients.
This case had not lasted long. After plaintiffs filed their complaint, we immediately responded with a motion to dismiss. This was because the complaint was poorly written, without any factual substance and legal basis. Plaintiffs then amended their complaint, significantly altered the initial landscape of the complaint, even added additional defendant in an effort to boost their case. We quickly filed a second motion to dismiss. In the end, legal fiction, no matter how voluminous it seemed, could not save plaintiffs’ ill-conceived complaint. The district court agreed with us and dismissed this case.
Whether prosecuting or defending, we handle your case with uttermost care and best effort. If you or your company need a competent law firm to handle disputes or litigation, please contact us.
Overall trend. The mergers and acquisitions Lei Jiang LLC handled in 2016 are mostly global in nature, involving Asia Pacific companies as buyers and American companies as sellers. The dominant buyers are again Chinese companies. But we see different Chinese buyers, including Chinese private equity firms, publically listed companies, and even private owned companies. The traditional outbound M&A was dominated by Chinese state-owned enterprises. The new trend signaled a broader bases, bigger appetite, and increased capacity for Chinese companies to acquire U.S. companies.
Although this new array of buyers has very short track record of cross-regional M&A, they have showed some experience and are comfortable in the deal. From our dealing with these customers, we have discerned factors behind this buying spree. They are 1) to boost the growth rate of the company, 2) lack of domestic targets for acquisitions, and 3) ease of the restrictions on finance.
Implications for U.S. companies. U.S. companies should consider Chinese companies as legitimate partners and buyers if they want to fully utilize the value. First, Chinese companies normally pay higher premium in acquiring U.S. companies. They take into consideration of the long term development and potentials. Second, consistent with Chinese culture, Chinese buyers place high value on the relationship with the management before, during and after the transaction. Moreover, in the M&A we handled in 2016, all Chinese buyers have retained the management team and given generous compensations to the U.S. teams. Finally, according to Forbes, by the end of August 2016, China was so far the top acquirer of foreign companies. If the trend continued to the end of year, China would unseat the USA for the first time since 2006. Thus, U.S. companies simply cannot afford to ignore this group of acquirers.
Implications for Chinese/Asia Pacific companies. As mentioned, Chinese companies typically adopt a longer-time investment evaluation, causing them to pay a relatively higher premium. Moreover, paying premium to retain the target’s management team shows that Chinese companies are not familiar with the dynamics of the overseas market and are not capable of running the target initially. Still, cross-regional M&A can be a value enhancing strategy for Chinese companies. If it fits their long-term strategies, in the long run these companies will gain a competitive advantage in the global market.
Lei Jiang Law Firm has successfully concluded several M&A deals in 2016. Some are still in the process. We are proud to provide top-notch M&A services to our clients. Our team are skilled in cross-regional M&A. We understand the cultural difference, language nuance, and different regulatory requirements. We are here to make it happen.
One more successful trial was conducted by attorneys in Lei Jiang Law Firm. Attorney Jiang was the lead counsel. He, et al. v. Rom, et al., Case No. 1:15-CV-01869, was initially filed as a class action in the U.S. District Court for Northern District of Ohio. Three Plaintiffs represented a class of 140 people against eight individual and corporate defendants. Class action, international parties, service issues, taking evidence under Hague Convention, and electronic discovery all render this case one of the most complex cases. But we see it as an opportunity to establish ourselves in the global litigation and advanced dispute resolution arena.
Electronic discovery presented a unique challenge in this case. Our firm represented Plaintiffs and were dumped with 86 gigabyte (GB) of electronic stored information (ESI) after a successful motion to compel filed by us. The dumping was just one month before the discovery cut off deadline. Considering that 1GB typically contains 64,782 pages of documents (more pages for email files). 86 GB contains an enormous amount of documents for review. Yet, we swiftly employed a comprehensive strategy, utilized latest software and platform, and conducted document review in the most effective and efficient manner. Our team, attorneys and computer forensic expert, worked diligently on the data. As a result, the relevant information was quickly extracted for litigation. We were able to review a large amount of information within a relatively short period of time.
Although Plaintiffs’ effort in class certification failed, the final result was a success. The case proceeded to the trial. Four day trial resulted a complete victory for our clients. Plaintiffs prevailed on all claims submitted to the jury, including fraud and violation of Ohio Deceptive Trade Practice Action. Plaintiffs also successfully pierced corporate veils of all remaining corporate defendants – make their owner personally liable for the corporate misconduct. Finally, Plaintiffs were awarded with punitive damage and attorney fee. This is a stunning victory for Plaintiffs, considering fraud, piercing the corporate veil, and seeking punitive damage were the most difficult tasks in any lawsuit.
In this case, we also utilized new technology for virtual remote deposition and contemporaneous transmission of trial testimony from the other side of the globe – Hong Kong. The new technology we used was tested first time in the Northern District of Ohio. It significantly reduced the cost, and eased restrictions on time, place, facility and equipment. In this case, legal expertise and technologies were worked together seamlessly.
It must be mentioned that Plaintiffs were lucky to have the case be heard in the court of honorable Judge James Gwin. Judge Gwin took no shortcuts, made no detours, and in this case, he made the full journey necessary to accomplish justice.
If you or your company need a competent law firm to handle international disputes or litigation, please contact us.
Ms. Jiang is selected to Super Lawyers Rising Star in 2017, an honor reserved for only 2.5% of lawyers who exhibit excellence in practice in their early years.
Ms. Jiang was first selected to the Ohio Rising Starts in 2015. Since then, she has continued the pursuit of excellence in the legal profession and has been selected as Rising Star continuously since.
A program of Thomson Reuters, Ohio Super Lawyers is a rating service of outstanding lawyers who, through a peer review and independent research process, have been identified as attaining a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only the top 5 percent of Ohio’s 40,000 lawyers and the top 2.5 percent of up-and-coming Ohio lawyers are named to the Super Lawyers and Rising Stars lists.
Since being admitted to the Ohio bar in 2009, Ms. Jiang has focused her practice on business and related dispute resolutions. From local transactions to international transactions, Ms. Jiang represents clients in all aspects of the deals. In addition to busy deal making, Ms. Jiang also help clients to resolve business disputes, secure patent and other intellectual properties, and obtain proper visas for international clients so they could conduct business in the United States. Although Ms. Jiang is still in her early years of practice, the breath and the depth of her areas and knowledge is remarkable. She is not only a licensed patent lawyer and an immigration attorney, but also regularly counsel clients on business and tax issues.
On August 23, 2015, Ms. Zheng and several others, as representatives of a class, filed a class action at U.S. District Court Northern District of Ohio against the biggest online real estate investment portal in China SouFun Holding Ltd. and SouFun International Ltd.
The complaint alleged fraud, violation of Ohio Deceptive Trade Practice Act, violation of Ohio Consumer Sales Practice Law, violation of Ohio real estate law, unjust enrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty. Lei Jiang Law Firm represents Plaintiffs and the class.
Since this is a case involving international parties, the service was a challenge because it must go through Hague Convention service of process. Plaintiffs successfully perfected the service through Hague Convention.
Major Chinese media in China and U.S. have reported this case. The case is closely watched by many due to the ever increasing trend of Chinese investing in U.S. and global real estate.
For report from the People’s Daily, the official media, click here.
Reports from the biggest Chinese media (in Chinese) QQ, Sina, SOHU, NETEASE.
Reports from the biggest U.S. Chinese media (in Chinese) USChinaPress， 中金在线.
One more criminal case against our client was dismissed on September 16, 2016. The case 2016 CRB 661 involved a charge of prostitution. Such charge, if established, would destroy the client’s life since she is a young woman.
We are committed to maximizing the chances of winning your case, even when it means beating the odds. In this case, prosecution claimed to have video and undercover police as witnesses. But after careful review of the evidence, we believe that the case was not as strong as the prosecution would like us to believe. After negotiation, the prosecutor dismissed the case against our client. Our client was thrilled.
If you are facing criminal charges, please contact us. The initial consultation is free.
Two criminal cases against our clients were dismissed on September 14, 2016 in the Massillon Municipal Court. 2015-CRB-02525 & 2015-CRB-02527 involved two defendants with multiple M1 charges. We worked on both cases diligently, gathered large amount of evidence, and filed motion to suppress. In the end, the prosecutor dismissed both cases.
Our approach in criminal cases is thorough defense. With so much at the stake, your freedom, relationships, career, and future opportunities, you absolutely need a strong representation of a firm that is one hundred percent committed to fight for your best interest. We can help to reduce heavy fines, lengthy incarceration, parole and other harsh penalties.
Our firm is also equipped to provide legal representation to clients from various backgrounds and ethnicities, especially clients from Asia. We have teamed up with experienced interpreting services to provide other languages such as Spanish, Arabic, Russian, Croatian, Korean, Filipino, Hindi, Japanese, Laotian, Vietnamese, etc. Our attorneys speak Chinese and Cantonese.
If you need a good lawyer to defend you in a criminal case, you will not be disappointed by our work. Contact us. The initial consultation is free.
To keep the government running, the Congress has just approved another stopgap continuing resolution, which means that the EB-5 program will remain for most of the 2016. However, it has been widely anticipated that legislation in some form will be enacted shortly to renew and reform the Program.
The current EB-5 program, which offers a family-sized set of green cards to foreigners who directly invest $1 million, or invest $500,000 into targeted employment areas (“TEAs”), has been very popular among Chinese investors in recent years.
Under the proposed legislation, once passed, the minimum investment amount in rural and high-unemployment areas would be increased from $500,000 to $800,000. For the investment projects that already had I-924 and I-526 approvals, they will enjoy a 60-day grace period. Thus, if investors submit the application within 30 days of the effective date of the new legislation, the investment amount is $600,000; between the 31st day and the 60th day, the amount is $700,000; and starting the 61st day, the amount will be adjusted to $800,000. Investment to non-TEAs will be adjusted to $1.2 million.
Also, the new legislation will redefine what constitutes the TEA. TEA designation will be tightened up. Further, the new legislation will allot a certain number of visas to different investment categories, such as 2,000 visas for projects in rural areas and 2,000 visas for people who invest $1 million, while the total number of visas remains the same.
Finally the new legislation will require more disclosure regarding how the capital is being utilized, and investors’ source of funds. The current EB-5 program has been under fire when 35 Chinese investors who lost nearly $20 million in South Dakota’s EB-5 program sued the state for fraud.
Although investors can be relieved for now, changes are likely to come. Our firm will monitor closely of any development. Let’s sit tight and wait for what is coming. Please contact us for any EB5 questions.