How much of a proprietary system's detail needs to be disclosed for the petition?

Enough for a reviewer to understand the process and the applicant's role in it, without necessarily disclosing every confidential engineering detail. Coordinate with the employer on what can be shared openly.

Choose evidence that answers the question without oversharing

Project summaries, training records, and internal documentation that explain the system's function and the applicant's history with it are generally more useful than raw proprietary files. Confirm with the employer what needs confidentiality protection before submission.

Agree on a disclosure plan before assembling exhibits. Identify the claimed organizational knowledge, the American tasks requiring it, who can authenticate each record, and which material can be summarized, excerpted, or redacted without making the explanation unverifiable. The standard has two branches: special knowledge tied to the organization’s products and services, its research, equipment, techniques, management, or other interests as applied internationally; or advanced knowledge of that organization’s processes and procedures. A common mistake is filing pages of unexplained technical material—or nothing beyond a confidentiality assertion—without connecting the applicant to the relevant knowledge.

Hypothetical example: A LaSalle specialist maintains a cold-chain monitoring platform customized by the Canadian employer for its affiliated American distributor. Counsel could coordinate a system architecture summary, version history, access records, training notes, and a manager’s account of the employee’s configuration decisions. Customer names and security credentials should remain protected, while authorized evidence still explains the platform and proposed duties. The company should also document its affiliate relationship and the employee’s continuous qualifying foreign year; a confidentiality protocol does not replace either threshold requirement.