A previous name does not by itself establish ineligibility. Document the identity connection and assess the underlying investment evidence on its facts. Deal with the two questions in sequence rather than together. Identity is a documentary problem with a knowable answer; the investment elements are a substantive problem that may take months of records to establish. Settle the first, then spend on the second.
Connect the person without skipping the capital inquiry
Explain why the records refer to you. The case still needs evidence of the actual qualifying contribution, lawful source and path and the other EB-5 elements; a name-change record is not a substitute for those proofs. Date the contribution before anything else, because the applicable requirements are set by rules that change over time and the version that governs depends on when a filing is made rather than on when the money moved.
Have counsel confirm which framework applies to the intended filing, and verify any current threshold from the official source rather than from a project's marketing pack. The substantive elements do not bend to a tidy identity file: capital must be at risk in a new commercial enterprise, the required job creation must occur, the lawful source and path of the funds must be traceable, and the investor must remain engaged at least at the policy level. A name-change record answers none of those.