Integrity Legal
- Legal Blog
- Integrity Legal Home
- Thai Visa
- Company in Thailand
- Real Estate Thailand
- US Visa
- Contact Us
Archive for the ‘Visa Waiver’ Category
6th November 2009
The Visa Waiver Program, 221g denials, and ESTA
Posted by : admin
The United States visa waiver program, not to be confused with an I-601 waiver, allows citizens from certain countries to enter the United States of American without obtaining a visa prior to arrival. In recent years the United States government has implemented ESTA, also known as: the Electronic System for Travel Authorization. ESTA requires that travelers wishing to enter the country on a visa waiver inform the US Immigration authorities prior to arrival so that a pre-screening can be conducted. The United States Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Service is tasked with monitoring those seeking travel clearances using the ESTA system. Recently it has been reported by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) that 221g denials must be reported in the ESTA form, to quote AILA directly:
“CBP recently informed AILA that it, after consultation with the Department of State (DOS), is classifying all §221(g) actions on visa applications as visa “denials.” Thus, Visa Waiver Program (VWP) applicants, who are subject to INA §221(g) refusals, should answer affirmatively in their ESTA applications that they have been denied a visa. This suggestion applies even if the reason for the refusal is due to consular administrative processing. If VWP travelers do not disclose such a “denial” on their ESTA applications or provide an update regarding such “denials,” they may have their ESTA registration rejected or be sent to secondary inspection and potentially refused entry when they apply for admission to the United States.”
This is important to note for those originating from a country participating in the US visa waiver program. For example, if the foreign fiancee of a US Citizen has been issued a 221g with regard to a K1 visa application, then that 221g must be disclosed as a denial on the ESTA form if said fiancee intends to visit the US and the foreign fiancee’s home country participates in this program.
As AILA’s article went on to point out, the Department of State does not even consider 221(g)’s to be outright denials,
Technically, the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) classifies a §221(g) action as a visa “refusal,” but DOS explicitly retains authority to “reactivate” the visa application upon receipt of required documents or completion of a government mandated administrative clearance. See 9 FAM 41.121 N2.4.
This situation is a classic example of two different government agencies taking a differing view of the same situation. The Department of State seems to view 221g refusals as administrative refusals to issue a visa without further documentation while the Department of Homeland Security seems to view such refusals as US visa denials that could be viewed as grounds for denying a person’s subsequent entry into the USA.
This issue will likely not be particularly problematic in the Kingdom of Thailand as Thailand is not a country participating in the visa waiver program, but for others around the world this issue could lead to problems entering the USA.
For those in this situation, it is always advisable to be honest, but it may be possible to explain the situation by answering “yes” to the question: Have you ever been denied a U.S. visa or entry? After answering in the affirmative there should be space to explain. Therefore, the applicant probably should note that the denial was: a 221(g), at the Embassy or Consulate (example: US Embassy Bangkok, US Consulate Chiang Mia, US Embassy Burma, etc.), and the reason for the “denial” (example: Embassy conducted administrative processing, Consulate requested further documentation, etc).
31st October 2009
HIV Infection Will No Longer Be A Legal Ground Of Inadmissibility
Posted by : admin
As reported previously on this blog, HIV is to be taken off of the list of communicable diseases which can cause an Immigrant to be deemed inadmissible to the United States of America. At the time of this writing, anyone who has HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) is not admissible to the United States. This means that those infected with the virus must obtain an I-601 waiver of inadmissibility before they will be allowed to enter the United States. Under the new rule, this will no longer be the case.
To quote a document, provided courtesy of AILA, promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services:
As a result of this final rule, aliens will no longer be inadmissible into the United States based solely on the ground they are infected with HIV, and they will not be required to undergo HIV testing as part of the required medical examination for U.S. immigration.
As a result of this rule change, it is highly likely that Embassy mandated medical examinations will be greatly altered as it will no longer be necessary for the Embassy-approved doctors (sometimes referred to as civil surgeons) to test prospective immigrants for HIV.
This rule change reflects the new policy of the United States government regarding HIV. Basically the Center for Disease Control and the authorities at the Department of Homeland Security no longer consider HIV a “communicable” disease as defined in the relevant provisions of Immigration and Nationality Act. To further quote the aforementioned document:
While HIV infection is a serious health condition, it is not a communicable disease that is a significant public health risk for introduction, transmission, and spread to the U.S. population through casual contact.
Please note that this rule has not taken effect and until it does HIV is still considered a communicable disease in cases involving inadmissibility.
Although many laud the promulgation of this rule, there are those, particularly in the LGBT community who feel that the current Administration is not doing enough to provide immigration benefits to same sex couples. Many view this rule change as a “half measure” designed to placate advocates for gay rights as HIV has a major impact upon the gay and lesbian community.
Although this rule change will effect those with HIV who wish to enter the USA, it does not effect same-sex bi-national couples who cannot obtain US Immigration benefits for a foreign partner based upon the current federal laws which do not recognize same-sex marriage. There are many who feel that the rescission of this rule regarding HIV infected immigrants falls short of full immigration equality for all.
23rd October 2009
Changes to the I-601 Waiver Application Form
Posted by : admin
Recently the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) announced that a revised form has been issued for those who wish to file for an I-601 Waiver. An I-601 waiver is a waiver of legal grounds of inadmissibility under the United States Immigration and Nationality Act. An alien is found inadmissible if they meet the elements of inadmissibility under the act. Common grounds of inadmissibility among applicants in Thailand are overstay, prostitution, Crimes involving moral turpitude, and health related grounds. If a finding that one of these grounds exists is made by the Consular or Immigration officers, then the applicant must seek an I-601 waiver before they will be entitled to enter the United State lawfully.
In recent days, USCIS has been revising some of the forms that they will accept in connection with certain immigration matters. For example, USCIS recently announced that they will only be accepting an updated version of the G28 Notice of Attorney Appearance. Those who have already filed applications for Immigration benefits before this update comes into effect will not need to submit any new forms as the service will continue to recognize the old forms in an effort to seamlessly transition from the old forms to the new. These efforts seem to be an attempt to streamline the, somewhat complicated, administrative aspects of the US Immigration application process. To quote directly from the USCIS press release:
USCIS has revised Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility (Revision Date 04/06/09 N, OMB Expiration Date 04/30/11) to make it easier for applicants to complete. Applicants may now select from a list of grounds of inadmissibility on the form itself and mark all which apply to them in order to request a waiver. In addition to the list, the form includes a section where applicants can describe, in their own words, why they believe they are inadmissible. In the previous edition of Form I-601, information about grounds of inadmissibility could only be found of the form’s instructions.
We applaud the efforts on the part of the Service to make this process less complicated and more straightforward. For those interested in submitting a successful I-601 waiver application, it should be remembered that in most cases involving an I-601 waiver, the applicant(s) must show that to deny the waiver would result in an “extreme hardship” to a United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident. This can be a difficult legal obstacle to overcome which is why it may be wise to retain an immigration lawyer to assist with the preparation and submission of such a petition.
Unlike the United States Embassy in Bangkok, which only has jurisdiction ovr the Kingdom of Thailand. The local USCIS office in Bangkok has administrative jurisdiction over most of Asia. Therefore, I-601 waiver applications filed in connection with a K1 visa, K3 visa, or CR1 visa sought from Asia could be submitted at USCIS Bangkok.
12th September 2009
US Visa Thailand: I-601 Waivers for Overstay in the USA
Posted by : admin
Every year, many people from all over the world enter the United States of America and remain temporarily. As previously mentioned on this blog and on this website, there are many different types of non-immigrant visas for those who wish to go to the United States and remain for a short period of time or for a particular endeavor which has a definitive chronological endpoint.
United States Tourist visas are a prime example of a non-immigrant category visa that can grant the applicant a long duration of stay. This type of visa is meant for those entering the USA for recreational purposes who intend to leave after their vacation has ended. US Student visas are meant for those who are traveling to the United States to engage in a course of study. Finally American Exchange visitor visas are designed for those who wish to travel to America to live and/or work in a travel exchange program.
With any of the aforementioned visa categories the underlying visa’s validity has an end date. When the non-immigrant visa’s expiration date arrives, the applicant must either depart the United States or seek an extension. An US visa extension is similar to a Thai visa extension in that the applicant must apply for the extension while in the country and if granted, the applicant may remain for longer than the initial visa’s validity.
Those who do not depart or extend are considered in violation of their visa as they are overstaying its validity. In US Immigration circles, the alien is deemed to be in the United States “on overstay.” The longer a violator remains in the United States the higher the probability that the violator will be caught and either removed from the country or given the option to voluntarily depart.
After departing the United States due to overstay, the alien may be deemed inadmissible depending upon the duration of the overstay. Further, the duration of the bar on reentry depends upon how long the violator overstayed. The alien could be subjected to a 10 year bar if he remained in the US without lawful status for a long enough period of time.
In cases involving inadmissibility based upon overstay it may be possible to obtain a waiver of the inadmissibility. The applicant will need to file an I-601 waiver in order to clear up the overstay issue because if the waiver is granted the applicant will be allowed to reenter the country on either an immigrant or non-immigrant visa.
If the alien was removed from the United States because of an overstay, it may be necessary to file an I-212 application for permission to apply for reentry. That being said, either application is approved only at the discretion of the adjudicating officer at the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service.
11th September 2009
US Deportation, Removal, and I-212 Applications to Reapply for Admission
Posted by : admin
On this website, there is a great deal of information regarding I-601 waivers and grounds of inadmissibility. However, there are other situations where a foreign national can be barred from reentering the United States of America. For example, where an alien has been deported or removed from the United States, they are usually subject to a reentry ban for a statutorily specified period of time. If a foreign national has been previously deported or removed from the United States, then that person must submit an I-212 application to reapply for admission to the United States (also known as advance permission to reenter).
Deportation and removal are technically the same thing as the terms can be used interchangeably. That being said, forms of removal from the United States should be looked at on a kind of legal spectrum. What is commonly referred to as “Deportation” occurs after a finding by an Immigration Judge that a person should be removed from the United States of America. Another form of removal is known as “expedited removal” this commonly occurs at a port of entry in the United States where a Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) Officer finds that an applicant for admission is not fit for entry under one or more of the provisions of the United States Immigration and Nationality Act. In many situations, a Border Patrol Officer will allow an applicant for admission to voluntarily withdraw their application and return to the point of origin. In this situation, which is akin to voluntary departure, the applicant’s US Immigration record is not adversely affected. However, it is within the officer’s discretion to place the alien in expedited deportation proceedings and thereby have them removed from the United States.
When an alien is removed from the United States through the use of expedited deportation, that alien is barred from reentering the United States without first receiving approval of the aforementioned statutorily mandated I-212 petition. These applications are somewhat similar to I-601 waivers in that the applicant must show something like extreme hardship to a United States Citizen would occur if the application were denied and the applicant remained inadmissible.
Avoiding expedited deportation at a port of entry (and the consequences arising therefrom) is just another reason why visa seekers should apply for a visa which comports with their intent. One who is viewed as using a United States tourist visa improperly (hiding their intention to marry in the US and adjust status) could be placed in expedited deportation proceedings. If removed, then a great deal of time and resources would need to be expended to deal with the inadmissibility. Therefore, it is not only ethically incumbent upon all applicants to be honest in their immigration endeavors, but it is also practical because avoiding expedited deportation is a great benefit from a long term perspective.
For the above described reasons, those wishing to bring a Thai loved one to the United States for the purpose of marriage are encouraged to utilize a K1 visa for this purpose as a fiance visa is the appropriate travel document reflecting the couple’s true intentions. For those already married, a CR1 visa or a K 3 visa is preferable to a tourist visa if adjustment of status is the ultimate goal.
9th August 2009
AILA: The American Immigration Lawyers Association
Posted by : admin
On this blog, we often mention, quote, or write about the American Immigration Lawyer’s Association (AILA). Some readers have become curious as to what this organization does and what they represent. Further, some people do not understand what membership means.
In other countries such as the United Kingdom and Australia, there exist what are known as registered Migration Consultants or OISC registered immigration advisers. In the United Kingdom, the organizations purposes is well articulated on their homepage which states that the OISC, “is responsible for regulating immigration advisers by ensuring they are fit and competent and act in the best interest of their clients.”
In the United States of America an attorney licensed and in good standing with either the United States Supreme Court or the highest court of at least on state is entitled to practice United States Immigration Law. However, unlike other countries with a history of common law, the United States does not have one singular regulatory body designed to monitor the activities of those who primarily act as a US Immigration lawyer.
In a way, the American Immigration Lawyer’s Association has come in to fill the breach regarding some of the duties inherent to a professional organization. The American Immigration Lawyers Association provides advice and mentoring for new attorneys practicing in the field of American Immigration. AILA also acts as a mechanism for advocacy on Capitol Hill. The American Immigration Lawyers Association disseminates information regarding pending legislation and provides resources regarding where interested parties can go to show their support for upcoming legislative initiatives.
One aspect of AILA that is particularly beneficial to the public at large is their campaign to eradicate so-called “notarios” and “Immigration consultants.” The American Immigration Lawyers Association provides information about where disaffected parties can go in order to lodge complaints against unscrupulous operators who prey on helpless victims who unwittingly retain their services believing they are real attorneys. In the United States this phenomenon is particularly common in the Latino communities. Oftentimes people are adversely affected by the activites of the notarios who offer either purposely malicious or incorrect advice.
It should be noted that membership in AILA is not necessarily indicative of one who can practice immigration law. Any attorney who is licensed and in good standing in at least one state can provide immigration advice. However, regular AILA members must have a license to practice law. Therefore, AILA membership is indicative of an ability to practice before USCIS.
Some “fly by night” operations in Thailand and throughout the world falsely make claims to membership in AILA. In order to verify if an operator is AILA approved, check the website and search for the attorney in question.
For more on US Immigration from Thailand please see:
K3 marriage visa or,
13th July 2009
US Visa Denial & Waiver: Are State Department Statistics Reliable?
Posted by : admin
There is some confusion regarding the American State Department’s estimates regarding visa denials from around the world. There are some who are under the mistaken impression that the State Department’s numbers are the definitive source for information regarding waivers of inadmissibility. In fact, any numbers published by the United States Department of State regarding I-601 waivers should be taken with a grain of salt because the American Department of State is not the agency tasked with handling the adjudication of I-601 waiver applications after the a United States Consular Officer at an Embassy or Consulate General has made a finding that a legal ground of inadmissibility exists in a particular Immigration case.
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) has the authority to grant waivers of inadmissibility under United States Immigration law. Therefore, USCIS’s internal statistics would be the proper government source to consult regarding the number waivers of inadmissibility applied for and ultimately granted. That being said, USCIS does not keep categorical statistics according to the Agenda of the USCIS National Stakeholder Meeting on January 27, 2009:
“Although we track the total number of Forms I-601 processed, USCIS International Operations does not have a system to track the specific grounds of inadmissibility that applicants seek to waive.”
The document that is causing the confusion regarding visa denials can be found at the following url. The first major cause of confusion in this document is the seemingly small number of findings of legal inadmissibility under section 212 (a)(2)(D)(i) for engaging in acts of prostitution or deriving profits from activities that are presumed to be prostitution. According to the table there were only 2 non-immigrant visa waivers granted in 2008 under section 212 (a)(2)(D)(i) of the United States Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). I find this number difficult to believe as this author has recently discussed the prostitution ground of legal inadmissibility with two highly experienced United States Immigration attorneys and between the two of them, they had applied for and obtained more than 2 non-immigrant visa waivers in 2008. Further, I believe it is highly likely that other prospective US Immigrants and non-immigrants were granted waivers of this ground of inadmissibility because I doubt that only two United States attorneys handled all of the waivers granted under this section of the INA in 2008; particularly if one takes into account not only other immigration attorneys, but I-601 waiver applications filed pro se as well.
For more on US Visas Please See: K-1 Visa or K-3 Visa
(This document is not intended as a source of legal advice, but for educational purposes. For legal advice contact an Attorney. No Lawyer-Client relationship should be deemed to exist between the writer and reader of this blog post.)
7th July 2009
Most United States Visas that process through the US Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand proceed in an efficient and uneventful manner. The Officers in the US Consular Section have a large caseload and generally do their job in a professional and diligent manner. This being said, some Immigration and visa cases are delayed. The term used in American Immigration circles when a visa application is set aside for further review is: administrative processing.
Administrative Processing and the 221(g)
Technically a 221g denial and request for more evidence could be classified as “administrative processing.” In practice, most cases that are in administrative processing have been red flagged because there is a suspicion of immigration fraud or there is some aspect of the case that the consular officer feels warrants further investigation. In cases such as this the application can be delayed for weeks or months until a final determination is made.
Does Administrative Processing mean a US Visa is Denied?
In some cases administrative processing can occur after a visa application has been denied and needs to be sent back to USCIS to close the case. In the case of a Fiance visa or marriage visa, this would likely only occur upon a factual finding by the consular officer that there is not a bona fide relationship underlying the visa application. This type of visa denial is very rare in US Family Immigration matters. However, a Consular officer who is suspicious about a particular visa application could put the case in administrative processing and ask for further documentation. The fraud unit would likely review the application further in order to ascertain the visa application’s merits.
There are other situations where a visa application could go into administrative processing. Of particular note are situations where beneficiaries have been present in the United States previously and have done things that may raise questions about what they were doing while stateside. A good example would be someone in the United States on a visa without work authorization who was working. This factual scenario would probably cause a case to go into administrative processing because the Consular officers would want to know more details about the applicant’s previous experience in the USA.
Administrative Processing is something many applicants seek to avoid and one of the best methods of doing so is to have a well prepared application. Further, Consular Officers are very well trained when it comes to picking up on cues that an application might be fraudulent. For this reason, we highly recommend that the best way to stay out of administrative processing is to file a bona fide application. Honesty is always the best policy when dealing with the United States Government and the US Embassy Thailand is no exception.
If a case should be denied because the applicant was deemed legally inadmissible, then an I-601 waiver may be sought.
For more information please See K-1 Visa Thailand or K3 Visa Thailand.
6th July 2009
Comparing and Contrasting US and Thai Immigration and Visas
Posted by : admin
US Immigration and Thai Immigration have a great deal in common and also many differences. I decided to write a quick blog post exploring the differences between the two systems in order to provide more clarity for those seeking to immigrate to either Thailand or the United States.
With regard to ease of visa obtainment, overall it is generally more difficult to obtain a USA visa than a Thai Visa. That being said, there are certain aspects of US Immigration that are far more generous than Thailand’s system. For example Thai Permanent Residence is very difficult to obtain from a practical standpoint and almost no one enters the country with Permanent Residence, especially if they have never been to Thailand before. In contrast, the United States confers lawful permanent residence upon entry to the USA for those married to a United States Citizen for longer than 2 years at the time of visa application. For those married less than 2 years at the time of application, conditional permanent residence is immediately granted upon entry and the conditionality must be lifted later.
A Thai Business Visa is somewhat similar to an American Business Visa in that both allow for travel to the USA or Thailand for business purposes. However, neither visa actually confers the right to work in either country. This is where the similarities end because in order to obtain lawful employment in the USA the immigrant would need to get a visa that has work authorization. In Thailand, the immigrant would need to obtain a Thai work permit. Getting work authorization for Thailand is somewhat easier in Thailand than in the United States.
The Thai Tourist Visa and the American Tourist Visa are quite similar. They both are non-immigrant visas designed for recreational purposes. Currently, the Thai Tourist visa is being offered free of charge to those wishing to visit the Kingdom of Thailand. This is not the case for the American tourist visa as a non-immigrant application fee and pin number fee are required for those applying for a tourist visa.
One of the most significant differences between United States Immigration and Immigration to Thailand is the fact that Thailand does not have any provisions in its Immigration law for a Fiance visa. The Fiancee Visa in the United States is commonly know by its visa category classification: K-1 visa. No matter what it is known as, it is designed to allow a Fiancee of an American Citizen entry into the United States for the purpose of marriage and permanent residence in the USA. Thailand has nothing remotely resembling this type of visa. Further, it does not appear that Thailand will be creating anything like the K1 Visa anytime soon.
Overall, Thai Immigration is dissimilar to American Immigration because US Immigration is far more substantially funded and has more agents operating under the aegis of USCIS and the US State Department.
(Nothing contained in this blog post should be used as legal advce. No Attorney/client relationship shall be created between author and reader.)
2nd July 2009
On July 2, 2009 the Center for Disease control formally proposed that HIV be dropped from the list of “communicable diseases” that result in a legal finding of inadmissibility. The following is quoted from the preamble of the proposal to change the rule:
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is proposing to revise the Part 34 regulation to remove “Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection” from the definition of “communicable disease of public health significance.” HHS/CDC is also proposing to remove references to “HIV” from the scope of examinations in its regulations. Aliens infected with a “communicable disease of public health significance” are inadmissible into the United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
This proposed rule change is subject to a comment period and is not yet finalized, but if it becomes final it will do away with the need to obtain an HIV waiver for a prospective immigrant infected with HIV.
For more information please click here
(This content is for educational use only. It does not constitute legal advice. No attorney/client relationship is created between the author and reader of this post.)
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.

Thailand Call: 02-266 3698
USA Call: 1-(316)-974-0454
