Foley & Mansfield’s International Business Law Group represents domestic and foreign clients in transactional, contentious, and advisory matters. We assist U.S. clients in establishing and expanding their global presence, and help foreign companies enter and conduct business in the U.S. market.
Our multidisciplinary team ably guides our clients with international interests through everything from structuring overseas investments and relationships, handling employment matters, effectively and efficiently resolving disputes through litigation or arbitration, to protecting and furthering the exploitation of their intellectual property.
The services that we provide to clients with complex employment-based international issues relating to U.S. law range from I-9, visa, and naturalization matters to estate planning for non U.S. citizens, including those with U.S. citizen spouses.
While historically a difficult market to enter, China offers numerous international investment and trade opportunities. Due to our close relationships with a network of practicing Chinese lawyers and an attorney who spends the majority of her time in Beijing, China, Foley & Mansfield is well-positioned to provide strategic advice and help our clients negotiate the complex Chinese legal system and regulatory environment, secure and protect their investments, and work within the Chinese business culture to overcome obstacles and attain their goals.
Furthermore, we have extensive experience in resolving disputes in China via arbitration and litigation. To our Chinese clients, we offer not only a comprehensive range of investment and corporate law services, but also our skill in securing EB-5 investment visas.
The group's chair, Seymour Mansfield, is a Director of US-China Business Connections (UCBC, www.ucbcgroup.org), a growing Minnesota based non-profit organization whose mission is to provide an educational forum, networking opportunities, and other resources for small and mid-sized companies, organizations and individuals interested in developing or furthering business relationships between the United States and China.
In addition, attorney Randi Miller, who lives and works primarily in Beijing, is a Director and founding member of US-China Business Executives Association (USCEA) based in New York City. Through their work with UCBC and USCEA, Seymour and Randi have extensive connections and resources from which they can draw to serve both American and Chinese clients, including independent Foreign Law Consultant Michail Digkas, based in Beijing.
When entering the China market, having assistance from the right partners saves time, money, and resources and can be crucial to success. Through our close ties to several China business consulting and service enterprises, we can direct clients to people who can assist them with a full spectrum of China market entry needs including:
- Finding and evaluating business partners, investment opportunities, suppliers, and distribution channels
- Market entry analysis
- Market entry strategy
- Operations strategy and support
- Special expertise in medical devices and technology
- Navigating cultural differences
Foley & Mansfield’s international business law legal services include:
- China Law
- Cross-border Investment Issues and Options
- Establishing, Financing and Operating Foreign Branches and Subsidiaries
- International Business Negotiations
- Independent Sales Representative Agreements
- Joint Ventures and Strategic Alliances
- Mergers and Acquisitions
- Structuring, Acquiring and Disposing of Real Estate Investments
- Stock and Asset Purchases and Sales
- Distribution Arrangements
- Global Employment Relations
- Encumbering Assets Abroad
- Intellectual Property Protection, Enforcement, Licensing, and Counseling
- International Dispute Resolution
- Trade Regulation
- Compliance with U.S. Securities and Export laws
- International Tax Planning
Holmes Wins Sixth Circuit Appeal on Civil Rights Claims
This case involved the Plaintiffs’ attempt to have a federal court grant them relief from a state court’s judgment against them. Ultimately, the case was dismissed on a number of grounds, including that Plaintiffs’ lawsuit violated well-established legal principles prohibiting “state court losers” from appealing to the federal courts, and that Plaintiffs were attempting to assert claims which are not recognized in the Sixth Circuit.