blog-hdr.gif

Integrity Legal

Archive for the ‘US Visa and Immigration’ Category

5th September 2009

This blog has often compared and contrasted the difference between the Immigration procedures for obtainment of a US Visa and a Thai Visa. To further compare the two systems, this post will provide a brief overview of the financial requirements one must meet in order to obtain a visa to Thailand or the United States of America.

In order to sponsor a traveler to the United States, one must first decipher the type of visa the traveler will be using. In the case of Non-Immigrant visas (F1 student visa, J1 exchange visa, or B1 Business Visa) the applicant must be able to prove that they or their sponsor will be able to pay the expenses related to the trip. In the case of F1 and J1 visas, the applicant must show that they will also fully pay for their educational endeavors or their exchange program. In some cases, the J1 visitor must reimburse the public education system where they stay in order to obtain the J1 visa.

In the case of United States Immigrant IR1 and CR1 visas for family members from Thailand, the American Citizen must show that they meet the income or financial requirements in order to act as sponsor for their loved one. The basic concern of the Consular officer revolves around the notion that the Immigrant could become a “public charge,” if the American Citizen does not have the resources to pay for the foreign spouse. An I-864 affidavit of support is used to assist in determining if the American is capable of sponsorship.

The K1 visa is a combination of the non-immigrant and immigrant visas. That being said, an affidavit of support must be filled out by the American Citizen. The difference between the I-134 and I-864 is the fact that the I-864 is more legally binding with regard to the sponsor. If the foreign entrant ever becomes a ward of the state, then the sponsor could be forced to reimburse the American government for the expenses the foreign national incurs. The K3 visa, although a marriage visa, is technically a non-immigrant visa so the American Citizen must simply submit an I-134 affidavit of support.

In Thailand, there are certain Thai visa categories which require that the applicant show that they have some sort of financial safety net. Visas such as the Thai retirement visa and the Thailand O visa (based upon marriage), require the visa holder to continually prove that they either meet a prescribed minimum monthly income or have a certain amount of money in a Thai bank account.

For those applying for Thai visas outside of Thailand, certain consulates have differing financial requirements depending upon the visa category. Therefore, one wishing to obtain a Thai Business Visa may be required to show a minimum bank balance. The minimum financial requirement may vary from post to post.

The United States Embassy in Thailand, diligently scrutinizes the financial resources of those applicants wishing to obtain an American visa. Many people believe that there is some sort of magic numerical amount of money that if shown in a bank account will guarantee visa application approval. In reality, the Embassy looks at the “whole picture” when making decisions on US tourist visas and often simply having a large bank balance is not enough to obtain a tourist visa. Further, in cases where an American boyfriend tranfers a large amount of money into a Thai applicant’s bank account in an effort to “beef up” the applicant’s credentials, the Embassy can tell that the bank balance is artificially inflated and will likely deny the application. It is never wise to manufacture evidence in order to obtain a United States visa on behalf of another.

more Comments: 04

3rd September 2009

In a recent announcement from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), Deferred Action will be granted to those widows and widowers of United States Citizens who die before the two year anniversary of the foreign spouse’s arrival in the United States of America. To quote the AILA press release:

“U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano, on June 9, 2009, announced that DHS would grant deferred action relief to surviving spouses of U.S. citizens who died before the second anniversary of their marriage. Based on the Secretary’s decision, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will temporarily suspend adjudication of visa petitions and adjustment applications filed for widow(er)s where the sole reason for an adverse decision from USCIS would be the death of a U.S. citizen spouse prior to the second anniversary of their marriage.”

The first question that probably comes to the mind of the reader is:  ok, so what does “deferred action” mean in practice? To further quote the USCIS press release:

“Deferred action is an exercise of prosecutorial discretion not to pursue removal from the United States of a particular foreigner for a specific period. Deferred action is not intended to be a permanent remedy for this situation; rather it is a temporary discretionary solution.”

In cases involving United States Immigrant visas, there are two types of immigrant visa categories for spouses of American Citizens. There is the Conditional Resident Visa (CR1) and the Immediate Relative Visa (IR1). The Conditional Resident Visa is meant for spouses of United States Citizens who have been married for less than two years. IR-1 visas are meant for those who have been married for more than 2 years. When a Permanent Resident is in CR-1 status, then they must apply for a lift of conditions before they change status to IR-1. If residence is conditional, then the immigrant must leave the USA  if the lift of conditionality is not filed and approved. In many cases, only the US Citizen spouse can file to have the conditions lifted. Therefore, if the US Citizen spouse dies before the lift of conditions is filed and approved then the Conditional Permanent Resident could fall out of status as soon as 2 years is up. Deferred action places the Resident in a kind of limbo in which they can lawfully remain in the USA, but are not moved in IR-1 status. The press release goes further and states:

“Aliens with deferred action may apply for an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) if they can establish an economic necessity for employment.”

Therefore, the alien in the US in this situation could work and reside without fear of being removed, but the situation would seem to be simply a temporary stopgap measure and it does not appear that this would be a viable long term legal option.

Bear in mind that this issue only deals with US spousal and fiancee visas after adjustment of status. Therefore, the above analysis is not relevant to the K1 visa or the K3 visa per se, although it would be relevant if the foreign fiancee or spouse adjusts to CR1 status.

more Comments: 04

25th August 2009

Apparently, the State of New York has made the decision to crack down on Immigration Consultants and so-called “visa agencies.” Only a licensed attorney or USCIS approved representative is entitled to prepare visa applications and petitions on behalf of clients pursuing United States Immigration benefits. In flagrant transgression of this rule, many companies in the United States of America provide unlicensed immigration advice. The State of New York has opted to take an aggressive position regarding this practice. To quote the a publication by the State of New York, promulgated through the American Immigration Lawyers Association:

“In thousands of cases across New York City and Long Island, these companies unlawfully filed immigration petitions with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on behalf of immigrants and their families, jeopardizing efforts to obtain legal status.”

Many people do not recognize how detrimentally these unscrupulous agencies can affect prospective immigrants’ chances of obtaining an American visa. The aforementioned publication quoted the New York Attorney General as saying:

“The consequences of bad legal advice can be absolutely devastating,” said Attorney General Cuomo. “Fraudulent legal services can haunt individuals and their families for a lifetime. Companies and individuals that represent someone in a legal proceeding without having the authority to do so must be stopped, and my office will hold them accountable.”

It is good to see that local authorities in the United States are taking a firm stand against these practices. In a way, cracking down on these types of enterprises is of assistance to all immigrants and prospective immigrants because United States Immigration is a field that has been somewhat plagued by “fly by night” operations masquerading as attorneys and law firms in an effort to swindle clients out of their hard earned money.

Many of these organizations advertise “guarantees” and “full refunds” for failure to achieve desired results. In many cases, these too good to be true propositions are simply gimmicks to get unsuspecting immigrants to part with their money. Unfortunately, in Thailand “visa agencies” and those pretending to be lawyers prey upon uninformed foreigners and Thais. This practice is particularly prevalent in Thailand because many applications for visas are filed on behalf of family members who are of Thai extraction. Since Thailand is a sovereign nation independent of American legal jurisdiction, it is difficult for American authorities to apprehend those falsely claiming to be American attorneys. Therefore, the consumer environment in Thailand with regard to legal services is: Buyer Beware. Always ask if the attorney can provide a copy of their license to practice law from at least one jurisdiction in the United States.

more Comments: 04

24th August 2009

Last week, United States President Barack Obama stated that reform of the US Immigration system is an important issue and one that will not be placed on the “backburner.” In the United States Congress and Senate, the Immigration debate is coming to the forefront with two proposed bills being brought to the floor in the next session. One proposed bill would stiffen enforcement and security measures with regard to illegal immigrants while creating more opportunities for immigrants to enter the United States legally.

The publication Businessweek reports that another proposed bill would, “limit the granting of H-1Bs, visas that are especially popular among U.S. tech companies like Microsoft as well as Indian IT services outsourcers like Infosys and Wipro.”

This same article makes note of the major contributions that many immigrant groups have made to the economy of the United States of America. There is a pervasive belief that only immigrant groups in the distant past have made a substantial positive impact upon the United States economy. As Businessweek points out, the Technology sector of the American economy has been greatly enhanced by immigrants to the United States as companies such as Google, Coca Cola, Pepsi, Motorola, and Berkshire Hathaway were either founded by, or currently managed by members of the American immigrant community.

An interesting aspect of the current immigration debate is the fact that it will occur at a time of decreased immigration to the USA. To further quote Businessweek:

“Ironically, the latest immigration fight will take place at a time when the U.S. has become a less attractive destination for many immigrants. Because of the recession, there’s less demand for low-cost labor. But the U.S. is also turning out to be less attractive for highly educated workers, too.”

As the People’s Republic of China and Asia generally becomes a more important region of the global economy, it stands to reason that more immigrants will be drawn to that continent in order to seek business opportunities. Hopefully, this fact will be taken into account when legislation regarding comprehensive immigration reform is drafted because in order to remain on the cutting edge of innovation the United States must continue to be viewed as the “land of opportunity,” by talented and ambitious prospective immigrants. Ideally, the proposed legislation to reform the American Immigration system will contain provisions that will make it easier for highly educated and highly skilled foreign labor to enter the United States.

For related information please see:

K1 visa

K3 visa

more Comments: 04

23rd August 2009

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) is a very large bureaucracy that handles the processing of many petitions for US Immigration benefits. The Service can take a great deal of time to process visa applications and simple delay is not considered out of the ordinary. That being said, there are certain situations in which a delay by USCIS is unwarranted.

If it becomes necessary to compel a government agency to fulfill their statutorily mandated obligations, then a Writ of Mandamus can be filed to compel the agency or officer to perform their duty. A Mandamus action is a civil action and is promulgated by a court of competent jurisdiction. It specifically compels a government officer to carry out their duties in the manner prescribed by law. A piece of legislation known as the Mandamus Act, can be found at 28 U.S.C.: 1361. This provision specifically states that Mandamus is an, “Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty.”

With regard to USCIS, a mandamus action will likely be brought before a Federal District Judge in a United States District Court. If granted, the court’s order will be binding upon the USCIS officer who allegedly failed to adequately fulfill his duties.

The writ of Mandamus exists for a very good reason as it was designed to create a check on the unfettered powers of government officers. That being said, those thinking of filing for a writ of mandamus should give the decision a great deal of thought because the ultimate result could turn out to be detrimental in certain cases. For example, should a case get caught up in the system making it necessary to file a Mandamus action, because the Mandamus order only compels the officer to take action, and does not compel the officer as to what decision should be made, it could turn out that the officer simply denies the application and the case comes to an end, albeit more quickly than it likely would have had the Mandamus order not been granted.

With this in mind, the Mandamus action should be utilized judiciously as not every case calls for it. In those cases where a Mandamus action would be appropriate, the seeker of such a writ should weigh all of his or her options in order to make a full determination as to whether the Mandamus action is appropriate in light of the unique facts in that particular case.

more Comments: 04

22nd August 2009

As the Obama Administration continues to put together a cogent piece of Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation, immigrant communities in the United States of America are becoming more politically active in an effort to make their views regarding the Immigration situation known.

One immigrant group of particular interest is that of first and second generation Asian-Americans. The blog Immigration Impact recently discussed the political clout that these Asian groups are beginning to harness:

“According to the Asian American Justice Center, there are currently more than 15 million Asian Americans residing in the United States—the majority of whom are foreign born and thus have firsthand knowledge of our woefully outdated immigration system. Countless Asians are caught in the family immigration backlogs and remain separated from close family members, and there are more than 1 million undocumented Asians in the U.S. today. Because the broken immigration system affects them in such a personal way, many in the Asian American community are banding together this week to attend town hall meetings with members of Congress, hold press conferences and petition lawmakers to fix our currently broken immigration system that restricts due process rights, breaks up families, and ultimately hurts the economy.”

The United States Embassy in Thailand processes a large number of US visa cases each year. Among the many US family based petitions are those for the K1 visa and Immigrant visas based upon an I-130 application and these are probably the most popular American visa categories.  The people entering on these types of visas eventually take up Permanent Residence either through adjustment of status or upon entry as an intending immigrant. Once stateside, many of these Thai immigrants in the United States eventually go on the naturalize as United States Citizens. These immigrants and their children have something of a unique opinion regarding immigration reform and as such it is most likely a net positive if they enter the public discourse on this important issue.

As Citizens or Lawful Permanent Residents of the United States, Asian American Immigrants probably account for a disproportionately large number of family based petitions in lower preference categories. A result of this situation is the fact that many of these families remain apart for long periods of time due to the quotas set on the various immigrant visa categories and the large caseload being processed by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS). Hopefully, Comprehensive Immigration Reform will untie the Gordian Knot of US Immigration for these separated families while at the same time assuring that America is safe and secure.

more Comments: 04

19th August 2009

Each year the United States Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand processes numerous applications for visas to the United States. In recent years, their caseload has become increasingly large particularly since tourist visa applicants and applicants for other non-immigrant visa categories (student, exchange visitor, etc.) have required interviews at the consular post. With this in mind, the Embassy also must conduct due diligence to ensure that those applying for visas are presenting a bona fide application.

In some cases, applicants attempt to defraud the United States consular officers by presenting a knowingly false application or attempting to acquire immigration benefits based upon a relationship that is not bona fide. Due to increasing demand for access to the United States, there has been an increasing number of instances where fraudulent applications are submitted. In an effort to curtail fraudulent applications, the United States Embassy has a division called the Fraud Prevention Unit.

The Fraud Prevention Unit’s mission is best described using the following excerpt from the website of the United States Embassy in the Dominican Republic:

“Welcome to the Fraud Prevention Unit of the U.S. Embassy in Santo Domingo.  Our principal mission is to safeguard U.S. borders by detecting and stopping fraud in applications for U.S. passports, Consular Reports of Birth Abroad, immigrant visas and nonimmigrant visas.  We accomplish this critical goal by training Consular Section staff on fraud detection, maintaining close cooperation with U.S. and Dominican law enforcement agencies and deploying our staff of highly trained investigators to conduct interviews and investigations.”

The US Embassy Bangkok also has a Fraud Prevention Unit with a similar, if not identical mandate. The Unit screens applications and applicants for red flags which could denote fraudulent activity. For instance, if an application for a K1 visa does not have a great deal of evidence that shows a bona fide relationship between the petitioner and beneficiary, then the case might be forwarded to the Fraud Prevention Unit for review. Most applications will never be placed under the scrutiny of the Fraud Prevention Unit, and the staff of the United States Embassy in Bangkok is very cooperative with regard to visa applications, but fraud prevention is a legitimate reason to scrutinize applications where the underlying bona fides are questionable.

For couples in a truly bona fide relationship, it is important to produce adequate documentation to show that the relationship is real and the parties are serious about their intentions. Further, lying to the officials at the Embassy or intentionally misrepresenting oneself before the Embassy is a good way of increasing the odds that the Fraud Prevention Unit will be looking over your visa petition and therefore it is not only ethically correct to tell the truth, but a better strategy for achieving one’s immigration goals.

more Comments: 04

18th August 2009

As President Obama appears to be retreating from campaign promises for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, there are new reports emerging that Immigration may be a boon to the economy of the United States of America.

The Wall Street Journal’s website from August 18, 2009 is quoted as stating:

“A new study published by the Cato Institute finds that the focus on repelling immigrant labor does more harm than good to the U.S. economy. “Increased enforcement and reduced low-skilled immigration have a significant negative impact on the income of U.S. households,” write Peter Dixon and Maureen Rimmer, the study’s authors. “In contrast, legalization of low-skilled immigrant workers would yield significant income gains for American workers and households.” A program that allowed more low-skilled foreigners to enter the U.S. workforce lawfully would put smugglers and document-forgers out of business, explain the authors. “It would also allow immigrants to have higher productivity and create more openings for Americans in higher-skilled occupations.”

Though somewhat counter intuitive, the tightening of security measures at United States borders may be helping to keep the American economy in the doldrums.

Of further interest in the Wall Street Journal’s article regards Mr. Obama’s backpedaling on the major issues involving American Immigration. To further quote the Wall Street Journal online:

“President Obama continues his quiet retreat from a campaign pledge to make comprehensive immigration reform “a top priority in my first year as President.” Following a summit meeting in Guadalajara last week with the leaders of Mexico and Canada, Mr. Obama said that an immigration overhaul will have to wait until next year.”

In the next Congressional session it is hoped that Comprehensive Immigration Reform will be dealt with and the current problems associated with large numbers of illegal aliens in the United States will finally be put to rest. Of further concern to some immigration equality advocates  is the issue of US family based visas for couples of the same sex. Currently the Defense of Marriage Act bars the Federal government from granting US Immigration benefits based upon a same sex marriage or an intent to enter into a same sex marriage.

However, these issues are resolved the underlying issue is one of decisiveness. The current Presidential Administration needs to begin making some difficult choices with regard to immigration. Many of these choices will not be well received by all segments of the United States population. Nonetheless, definitive action needs to be taken as many people in the United States continue to live in a kind of limbo and many couples remain separated from their loved ones abroad.

more Comments: 04

15th August 2009

The United States Visa process can be a time consuming proposition. In Thailand, we see many couples seeking fiance visas as well as marriage visas and for both types of visa the phase of the process which takes up the most time seems to be the approval process from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS). In previous blogposts we have discussed the K1 visa process and the K3 visa process. After submitting a K3 or K1 visa application, the couple must wait for USCIS approval before the visa interview at the US Embassy in Bangkok.

The California and Vermont Service Centers of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) have recently updated their timing estimates for US family based petitions submitted by Americans seeking Immigration benefits for their Thai loved ones. Of note, is the fact that the estimates for K1 fiance visas seems to have dropped by approximately thirty days.

As a courtesy to all bi-national couples seeking information regarding USCIS approval times we try to post accurate estimates reflecting the current processing times for family based petitions. Below are the most up to date estimates taken from the USCIS website.

California Service Center Processing Dates as of 06/30/2009

I-129F Petition for Alien Fiance(e) K-1/K-2 – Not yet married – fiance and/or dependent child 5 Months
I-129F Petition for Alien Fiance(e) K-3/K-4 – Already married – spouse and/or dependent child 5 Months
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative U.S. citizen filing for a spouse, parent, or child under 21 5 Months
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative U.S. citizen filing for an unmarried son or daughter over 21 January 08, 2004
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative U.S. citizen filing for a married son or daughter over 21 November 01, 2001
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative U.S. citizen filing for a brother or sister December 22, 1999
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative Permanent resident filling for a spouse or child under 21 January 15, 2006
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative Permanent resident filling for an unmarried son or daughter over 21 May 01, 2002
I-131 Application for Travel Document All other applicants for advance parole 3 Months

Vermont Service Center Processing Dates as of 06/30/2009

I-129F Petition for Alien Fiance(e) K-1/K-2 – Not yet married – fiance and/or dependent child 5 Months
I-129F Petition for Alien Fiance(e) K-3/K-4 – Already married – spouse and/or dependent child 5 Months
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative U.S. citizen filing for a spouse, parent, or child under 21 5 Months
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative U.S. citizen filing for an unmarried son or daughter over 21 July 02, 2006
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative U.S. citizen filing for a married son or daughter over 21 June 04, 2006
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative U.S. citizen filing for a brother or sister September 19, 2001
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative Permanent resident filling for a spouse or child under 21 January 18, 2006
I-130 Petition for Alien Relative Permanent resident filling for an unmarried son or daughter over 21 June 04, 2006
I-131 Application for Travel Document All other applicants for advance parole 3 Months
more Comments: 04

13th August 2009

As mentioned in previous posts on this blog, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service  (USCIS) is the relatively new incarnation of the agency formerly known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). Currently USCIS is headed by a director who reports to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Since the election of President Barack Obama there have been many new appointments to the upper echelons of the United States Federal bureaucracy. This week has seen the appointment of  a new Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service. Through their website, the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) is reporting information on the appointment:

“Director Alejandro Mayorkas was confirmed on August 7, 2009, to lead the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. A hearing to consider his nomination was held on June 24, 2009. On July 28, 2009, the Judiciary Committee ordered the nomination reported to the Senate for consideration.”

We here at Integrity Legal wish to congratulate Mr. Mayorkas on his recent appointment and wish him the best of luck in his future endeavors as Director of USCIS. Many proposed changes are in store for USCIS in the coming months and years and Mr. Mayorkas will oversee what will likely be great change within the agency.

Until reading this report, I was unaware that USCIS Director’s even needed Senatorial approval before taking office. Many United States Federal appointments must be confirmed by the United States Senate before the appointee will be allowed to take office. I was aware that this process was common for high ranking American officials like cabinet appointees or Supreme Court Justices, but I was under the misperception that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service was headed by a career federal civil servant and was not a political appointment. That being said, it makes a certain degree of sense to have the holder of this office politically appointed. USCIS is charged with bringing immigration policies into practice on behalf of the administration and as a result USCIS wields a tremendous amount of power with regard to how federal immigration law is practically implemented. Therefore, to keep USCIS policy in line with that of the administration it makes sense to politically appoint the head of that agency.

There are career civil servants who work for USCIS as the agency must remain functional during periods in which a director has yet to be confirmed by the US Senate. Career officers are appointed largely based upon merit and politics likely does not factor into their advancement within the agency.

more Comments: 04

The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely on advertisement. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. The information presented on this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.