
Integrity Legal
- Legal Blog
- Integrity Legal Home
- Thai Visa
- Company in Thailand
- Real Estate Thailand
- US Visa
- Contact Us
Archive for the ‘K1 Visa’ Category
16th July 2010
American Immigration: Frequently Asked Questions from Military Personnel
Posted by : admin
This blog is dedicated to providing relevant information for those with pending Immigration petitions before the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS). With that in mind, it is particularly important to provide relevant information to military personnel who have a spouse or loved one processing through the American Immigration system. This author recently discovered that USCIS has posted a set for frequently asked questions (and their answers) regarding the US Immigration process for military personnel and their families. Below is a list of Questions and Answers promulgated by USCIS and distributed by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA):
Questions and Answers for Members of the Military
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) offers immigration services and resources specifically for members of the U.S. Armed Forces and their families who are stationed in the United States and abroad. USCIS established a military assistance team to ensure that the military community receives quick and secure access to accurate information. Below is a list of answers to frequently asked questions received by our military assistance team.
Adjustments
Q. What is the fee for the Application for Naturalization (Form N-400) filed by spouses of military members?
A. The filing fee for the Application for Naturalization (Form N-400) is $675 ($595 plus a biometrics fee of $80). Individuals who submit FD-258 Fingerprint Cards directly to USCIS with their applications are not required to pay the biometrics fee. Applicants filing from within the United States should submit a single check or money order of $675 made payable to Department of Homeland Security or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Q. I am a military member stationed abroad with my dependents. Can my dependents have their naturalization interviews conducted overseas?
A. Yes. Certain spouses or children of service members residing abroad with that service member (as authorized by official orders) may be eligible to become naturalized citizens without having to travel to the United States for any part of the naturalization process. Please see “Fact Sheet: Requirements for Naturalization Abroad by Spouses of Members of the U.S. Armed Forces” and “Overseas Naturalization Eligibility for Certain Children of U.S. Armed Forces Members” on www.uscis.gov/military for more information.
If you have an appointment for a naturalization interview and you have transferred overseas, contact USCIS by calling the Military Help Line by telephone: 1-877-CIS-4MIL (1-877-247-4645) or email: [email protected] and request to have your case transferred to your nearest USCIS overseas office.
Submitting Biometrics
Q. I am an active duty military member and am required to submit biometrics at a USCIS Application Support Center (ASC). Do I need an appointment?
A. No. Active duty military members do not need an appointment and will be accepted on a walk-in basis at any ASC in the United States. You should bring your military ID with you to the ASC.
Q. Can I submit fingerprints before I file the Application for Naturalization (Form N-400)?
A. Yes. You may submit fingerprints even if you have not yet submitted an Application for Naturalization.
Q. Where can military members or dependents that are living abroad go to have the fingerprints taken?
A. Military members and dependents stationed abroad can submit 2 properly completed FD-258 Fingerprint Cards taken by the Military Police, Department of Homeland Security officials or U.S. Embassy or Consulate officials.
Q. If my military installation does not use FD-258, can I submit another type of fingerprint document instead?
A. FD-258 is the preferred document used to submit fingerprint, however USCIS may be able to accept a comparable document, such as the Department of Defense SF-87, in place of the FD-258. Please contact the USCIS Military Help Line at 1-877-CIS-4MIL (1-877-247-4645) for more information.
General Information
Q. What are the criteria to have an application or petition expedited for military personnel?
A. USCIS reviews all expedite requests on a case-by-case basis. Some examples of situations that may
qualify for expedited processing include:
• Pending military deployment
• Extreme emergent situation
• Humanitarian situation
Please contact your local USCIS office or the USCIS Military Help Line at 1 877 CIS 4MIL (1-877-
247-4645) for more information.
Q. I am an active duty military member stationed abroad. How do I check the status of my application?
A. You can check their status of any application by clicking on the “Check My Case Status” link on the right-hand side of this page. Note: when checking the status of an I-751, you must use the receipt number from the ASC appointment notice. You may also call the USCIS Military Help Line at 1-877-CIS-4MIL (1-877-247-4645).
It is admirable that USCIS took the time to provide this information to those serving in the American military. Many feel that one of the positive aspects of the US immigration system is the care and attention provided to members of the Armed Services and their families.
For information about Immigration options for Thai spouses and Fiances of US Citizens please see: US Marriage Visa or Fiance Visa Thailand.
15th July 2010
New Director Named For USCIS California Service Center
Posted by : admin
This blog routinely discusses issues and news relevant to US Immigration. In a recent announcement from the Office of Public Engagement, within the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), it was noted that a new Director has been named to oversee the activities of the California Service Center. The following is a copy of the announcement directly quoted from the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) website:
Dear Stakeholders,
USCIS Director Alejandro Mayorkas has appointed Rosemary Langley Melville, currently the Acting Regional Director in the Southeast Region, as the new California Service Center (CSC) Director. Ms. Melville will assume her new responsibilities in late August.
Effective Monday, July 12th Barbara Velarde, Deputy Associate Director for Service Center Operations, assumed the role of Acting Director of the CSC with Phoenix District Director John Kramar as the Acting Deputy Director. We look forward to working together as we continue to address areas of common interest.
The California Service Center plays an integral part in US Family Visa cases as it processes a large number of visa petitions each year. For those living in certain Western US States the California Service Center is most often the processing point for K1 visa applications as well as the I-129f petitions submitted in connection with the K3 Visa category.
Those seeking traditional US Marriage Visa benefits may also have their petition processed by the California Service Center. When an I-130 petition (used by those seeking the CR1 and/or IR1 visa) is submitted to USCIS, the Lockbox Facility will usually forward the petition to either the California Service Center or its counterpart, the USCIS Service Center in Vermont. USCIS adjudicates the merits of the petition and assuming there is an approval in the case the file will be forwarded to the Department of State’s National Visa Center where it will either be quickly forwarded to the proper US Consulate or US Embassy (as is the case in the K1 visa process or the K3 visa process) or the NVC will hold the petition and begin the process of accumulating relevant documentation. After necessary documents are compiled the whole file will be forwarded to the Consular Post with appropriate jurisdiction.
If a visa application is denied by the US Consulate then the file will be sent back to USCIS for revocation. Under certain circumstances, a petitioner may challenge a USCIS revocation.
For further information regarding recent developments pertaining to Consular Processing and USCIS revocation please see: US visa denial.
10th July 2010
American Citizen Sues Government Over K-1 Visa Denial Procedures
Posted by : admin
K1 visas are a topic frequently discussed on this web log as they are a rather popular travel document for those American Citizens who have a foreign fiancee living outside of the United States of America. That said, in a recently filed complaint before the Federal District Court of Oregon an American Citizen, Dzu Cong Tran, asked for declaratory and injunctive relief as well as a writ of mandamus in connection with his previously filed I-129f petition on behalf of his Vietnamese fiancee. To quote the opening of the complaint:
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Nearly three years ago, the former United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) Ombudsman Mr. Prakash Khatri issued recommendations to Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) and USCIS regarding necessary changes to the standards and
processes for re-adjudication of petitions returned by consular offices for revocation or revalidation, due to systemic nationwide failures of the system. Two years ago, Jonathan R. Scharfen, former Acting Director of USCIS under the Bush Administration responded to the USCIS Ombudsman’s recommendations, implementing only some of those recommendations and specifically rejecting others. This class action lawsuit involves some of the recommendations of the USCIS Ombudsman which were rejected by defendants, in addition to other issues.
Through the contradictory and unlawful practices of each defendant agency, plaintiff and class members have been aggrieved by agency action and inaction, have suffered agency action unlawfully withheld and unreasonably delayed, have been subjected to arbitrary, capricious and unlawful denials and file transfers, have been deprived of due process of law and had visa issuance and petition approval denied or unreasonably withheld contrary to constitutional right, contrary to procedure required by law, and contrary to the limitations of statutory jurisdiction and authority. Thousands of families across the country and around the
world have been separated due to a colossal sparring match between the defendant agencies, and because of internal dissent within each agency.
Specifically, Plaintiff Dzu Cong Tran, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, challenges (a) defendant U.S. State Department’s (State Department’s) policies and procedures for processing and returning approved petitions to defendant U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) with a recommendation that the petition be revoked; and (b) defendant USCIS’ policies and procedures for revoking, denying or terminating petitions returned to it by defendant State Department. Plaintiff respectfully petitions this Court for injunctive, declaratory and mandamus relief to: (a) compel State Department to schedule a
visa interview within a reasonable period from the date that State Department’s National Visa Center receives an approved I-129F petition for fiancé(e) from USCIS; (b) compel State Department to issue a K-1 visa to the fiancé(e) of a U.S. citizen or notify the petitioner and beneficiary that the petition will be returned to DHS/USCIS within reasonable period following interview; (c) compel State Department to provide a reasonable period during which a petitioner and beneficiary may rebut consular findings before the petition is returned to DHS/USCIS; (d) compel State Department to return petitions to DHS/USCIS only where substantial evidence
exists that fraud, misrepresentation, or ineligibility would lead to denial, and not where it is merely suspected; and to provide a written notice supported by the legal and factual basis for the visa denial and petition return that are not conclusive, speculative, equivocal or irrelevant; (e)compel State Department to render a final decision to approve the K-1 visa or return a petition to
DHS/USCIS within a reasonable period not to exceed 30 days from the receipt of all necessary documents from the petitioner and beneficiary, and to accomplish delivery of the petition to State Department’s National Visa Center within such period; (f) declare that 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(k)(5), which purports to limit the validity of a K-1 fiancé(e) petition (Form I-129F) to four months, is ultra vires and in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right; (g) following such declaration, enjoin DHS/USCIS from limiting the validity period of any approved fiancé(e) petition; (h) declare that the Foreign Affairs Manual, at 9 FAM 40.63 N10.1, which purports to establish the materiality of an alleged misrepresentation pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(6)(C)(i), INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i), merely based upon DHS/USCIS summary revocation of the petition is ultra vires and in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right; (i) issue a permanent injunction barring the State Department from placing a marker, called a “P6C1” marker, or “quasi-refusal” in a visa beneficiary’s record, and deeming the DHS/USCIS revocation of the petition as automatically establishing the permanent misrepresentation bar to any future immigration possibility; (j) compel DHS/USCIS to issue a notice to petitioner within a reasonable period of time not to exceed 30 days from receipt of the returned petition from the State Department, providing petitioner with the legal and factual basis for the consular recommendation that is not conclusive, speculative, equivocal or irrelevant; (k) compel DHS/USCIS to provide petitioner the opportunity to submit evidence to rebut the consular recommendation within a reasonable period of time; (l) compel DHS/USCIS, in the case of a reaffirmation of approval, to deliver the reaffirmed petition to the State Department within a reasonable period of time, and compel State Department to issue the K-1 visa within a reasonable period of time following reaffirmation; (m) compel DHS/USCIS, in the case of a denial, to issue a decision within a reasonable period of time, and to advise petitioner of the right to appeal the decision to the Administrative Appeals Office.
The United States of America’s immigration apparatus is complex and multifaceted. This is due to the fact that two Departments have a role in the Immigration process and within each of those Departments there are multiple government agencies with different roles at differing phases of the process. For example, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) and the United States Customs and Border Protection Service (USCBP), respectively, have jurisdiction over adjudication of visa petitions and inspection of aliens upon admission to the United States. In the interim, the Department of State, through the National Visa Center and each US Embassy or US Consulate abroad, is tasked with adjudicating visa applications and making determinations regarding an individual applicant’s admissibility to the USA. In the vast majority of cases involving a US visa denial the applicant will be provided written notice of the denial along with factual and legal reasons for the denial. Amongst many other things, the aforementioned complaint alleged that the:
State Department issued the [visa] denial based on mere suspicion and failed to provide a written notice supported by the legal and factual basis for the visa denial and petition return that was not conclusive, speculative, equivocal or irrelevant.
When a US visa application is denied, the Consular Officer issuing the denial should provide a written notice of denial based upon findings of fact and conclusions of law. The complaint, in essence, would seem to be alleging that the Officer at the US Consulate in HCMC did not provide a legally sufficient basis for denial. Of further interest within the complaint was the following allegation:
State Department, in its denial, stated that, “[i]f USCIS revokes the petition, beneficiary will become ineligible for a visa under section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Act.” INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(6)(C)(i), is a permanent bar to admissibility for misrepresentation. Pursuant to the Foreign Affairs Manual, 9 FAM 40.63 N10.1, State Department placed a marker, called a “P6C1” marker, or “quasi-refusal” in Ms. Pham’s records, and will deem USCIS revocation of the petition as automatically establishing the permanent misrepresentation bar to any future immigration possibility.
This is an interesting phenomenon. As the US Immigration system becomes more sophisticated Department of State refusals seem to be evermore problematic for those who may later seek admission to the United States. For example, in another post on this blog it was noted that those with a previously issued 221(g) denial from a US Embassy or US Consulate may be denied benefits under the visa waiver program pursuant regulations related to the Electronic System For Travel Authorization (ESTA). As ESTA is under the jurisdiction of the USCBP and since that agency considers 221g refusals to be denials, while the Department of State continues to refer to them as refusals, the issuance of 221g could lead to an otherwise admissible individual being deemed inadmissible to the United States. This author has never personally dealt with a situation in which a Consular Officer has denied a US visa without a factual or legal basis. Hopefully, this case will help ascertain the exact nature of visa refusals at Consulates and Embassies overseas. Bearing that in mind, the decision in a case such as this could have major ramifications upon Consular Processing procedures at virtually every US Consular Post abroad.
For further information related to the US fiance visa please see: K1 visa.
9th July 2010
Department of State To Amend the Biometric Visa Program
Posted by : admin
In a recent announcement from the American Department of State it was revealed that those agencies tasked with issuing US visas are to add security features to American travel documents issued to foreign nationals. To quote the announcement as posted on the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) website:
This public notice announces an amendment to the Biometric Visa Program. Section 303 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 has required, since October 26, 2004, that all visas issued by the Department must be machine-readable and tamper-resistant and use biometric identifiers. In consultation with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Department determined that fingerprints and a photo image should be required as biometric identifiers. When the biometric visa program began, available technology allowed for the efficient capture and comparisons of only two fingerscans. As a result of technological improvements, the Department instituted a ten fingerscan standard to raise the accuracy rate in matching fingerscans and enhanced our ability to detect and thwart persons who are eligible for visas.
As implied above, the Department of States is not the only American agency which will have a role in creating more effective security enhancements for American visas. The Department of Homeland Security will also play a part in this important endeavor. To further quote the announcement posted on the AILA website:
In establishing the Biometric Visa Program, the Department coordinated closely with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Biometric Visa Program is a partner program to the DHS US-VISIT Program that is in effect at U.S. ports of entry and that uses the same biometric identifiers. By coordinating these two programs, the two departments have ensured the integrity of the U.S. visa. This is accomplished by sending the fingerscans and photos of visa applicants to DHS databases. When a person to whom a visa has been issued arrives at a port of entry, his or her photo is retrieved from a database and projected on the computer screen of the Customs and Border Protection officer. The person’s fingerscans are compared to the fingerscans in the database to ensure that the person presenting the visa is the same as the person to whom the visa was issued.
The new security features are likely be used for visa categories such as the K1 visa, the K3 Visa, and the common US Family Immigrant visas (CR1 Visa, IR1 visa) not to mention the non-immigrant visa categories such as the B1 visa and the B2 visa. That said, it seems unlikely that this will have an adverse impact upon those who seek a US visa in compliance with relevant US law.
Although the full-scale implementation of this program has yet to take effect, there are many who feel that more effective security measures will help ensure that there will be less fraud perpetrated against the United States government by foreign nationals wishing to illegally enter the USA.
For further information specifically related to US Consular Processing in Thailand please see: US Embassy Thailand.
30th June 2010
USCIS Issues Notice Regarding Unused Family Based Visas
Posted by : admin
This blog primarily reports upon issues revolving around US Family Visas. With that in mind the following announcement was made in a press release from the United States Department of Homeland Security’s Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) Ombudsman, this quote is provided by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA):
During FY 2009 and FY 2010, usage of family-based visas has been exceptionally low, especially among spouses and children of green card holders (the F-2A preference category). In FY 2009, approximately 10,000 family-based visas were unused and, by statute, were reallocated for use by employment-based immigrants in FY 2010.
It is interesting to note the relative lack of interest in Family based visas under preference category F-2A because, in this author’s experience, there is little decline in the demand for spouse and family based visas for the immediate relatives of American Citizens. That said, there seems to have been a slight decrease in demand for the K1 visa in Thailand, but this is likely attributable to the recent unrest in the city of Bangkok.
For those readers who are unaware, United States Citizens may petition for their foreign fiancee to travel to the USA on a K1 Fiance Visa. After arrival the fiancee must marry the American petitioner within 90 days of entry and subsequently file an application for adjustment of status. Those American Citizens with a spouse overseas may petition for a US Marriage Visa. There are multiple marriage visa categories although the once popular K3 Visa is no longer being processed by the National Visa Center where the underlying visa petition arrives contemporaneously or before the K3 visa application.
For those who are not United States Citizens, a K1 visa is not available for the fiancees of Lawful Permanent Residents. Furthermore, the spouse of a Lawful Permanent Resident is not given high priority compared to the spouse of a US Citizen. This preference has existed for a relatively long period of time. There are those who argue for “rolling over” the balance of preference petitions in order to provide a chance for later applicants to enjoy the higher relative priority. That being said, current Immigration policy favors employment petitions if there is are any unused visa numbers in the aforementioned family based category.
Some speculate that Comprehensive Immigration Reform will have a dramatic impact upon the overall Immigration system, but for now the current system remains and those seeking a family based visa in the F-2a category would be wise to file sooner rather than later.
28th June 2010
Holiday Closing Schedule for the US Consulate-General in Guangzhou China
Posted by : admin
On this blog we regularly post information of general interest to Americans or prospective immigrants seeking services at American Embassies or Consulates abroad. The following is the posted holiday closing schedule for the United States Consulate-General in Guangzhou, China. The following is a direct quotation from the US Embassy in China’s website:
We are CLOSED on the following American and Chinese holidays.
Date |
Weekday |
Holiday |
Nation |
January 1 | Friday | New Year’s Day | US & China |
January 18 | Monday | Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Birthday | US |
February 13 - 17 | Saturday – Wednesday | Chinese (Lunar) New Year | China |
February 15 | Monday | President’s Day | US |
April 5 | Monday | Tomb Sweeping Day | China |
May 1 – 3 | Saturday – Monday | International Labor Day | China |
May 31 | Monday | Memorial Day | US |
June 16 | Wednesday | Dragon Boat Festival | China |
July 5 | Monday | Independence Day | US |
September 6 | Monday | Labor Day | US |
September 22 | Wednesday | Mid-Autumn Festival | China |
October 1 – 5 | Friday - Tuesday | Chinese National Day | China |
October 11 | Monday | Columbus Day | US |
November 11 | Thursday | Veterans’ Day | US |
November 25 | Thursday | Thanksgiving Day | US |
December 24 | Friday | Christmas Day | US |
December 31 | Friday | New Year’s Day (2011) |
Holiday closure schedules can be very important for Americans as there often arise situations in which an American believes that the closest US Embassy or US Consulate will be open for business when, in fact, the Embassy or Consulate is closed for a holiday in the host country or one of the more obscure US holidays. This author has personally been the victim of this problem when traveling to the US Embassy in Bangkok and realizing that the Embassy was closed for American Veterans Day. To save others time and frustration, we try to post these lists so that travelers can plan accordingly.
Many Americans traveling overseas find that they need the assistance of an American Citizen Services (ACS) section of an American Embassy or Consulate overseas. Many find that they need ACS to produce a replacement US passport, add visa pages, or, in some cases, more serious matters must be dealt with that can only be executed by an American Consular Officer.
In situations where a prospective immigrant to the United States wishes to set a visa interview appointment for a K1 visa, a K3 visa, a CR1 visa, or an IR1 visa it may be best if the applicant makes an appointment prior to traveling to the Post in order to be sure that the Post is functioning upon arrival. This is also the case for those seeking a non-immigrant visa such as a B1 visa, B2 visa, F1 visa, or J1 visa. Interviews for these types of travel documents are usually scheduled in advance, but it is recommended that one contact the post prior to interview in order to be fully apprised as to the pertinent protocols.
27th June 2010
Holiday Closing Schedule for the US Embassy in Beijing, China
Posted by : admin
On this blog, we try to provide information for those individuals (be they American Citizens, Lawful Permanent Residents, or prospective immigrants) who may have business with US Embassies and Consulates overseas. That said, the following information is quoted from the website of the United States Embassy in Beijing, China:
The Embassy is open from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. We are closed on the following American and Chinese holidays:
Embassy Holidays for 2010
*** January 1 Friday New Year’s Day
* January 18 Monday Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Birthday
** February 13-17 Sat-Wed Chinese (Lunar) New Year
* February 15 Monday President’s Day
** April 5 Monday Tomb Sweeping Day
** May 1-3 Sat-Mon International Labor Day
* May 31 Monday Memorial Day
** June 16 Wednesday Dragon Boat Festival
* July 5 Monday Independence Day
* September 6 Monday Labor Day
** September 22 Wednesday Mid-Autumn Festival
** October 1-5 Fri-Tuesday Chinese National Day
* October 11 Monday Columbus Day
* November 11 Thursday Veterans’ Day
* November 25 Thursday Thanksgiving Day
* December 24 Friday Christmas Day
Those who may be traveling to any US Embassy or US Consulate abroad are generally wise to at least attempt to make an appointment to visit the Embassy in advance. This is particularly true for those seeking assistance from the American Citizen Services Section of US Missions abroad. In many cases, an appointment can be made in advance and this allows the Consular Officers to better anticipate customer needs thereby streamlining the overall process. Those seeking an appointment should first find the official website of the US Embassy in their country of residence and make scheduling decisions accordingly.
In the case of those seeking visas to the USA, American Consulates generally make visa interview appointment on a “first come, first serve” basis. As each post has different administrative protocols it may be wise to contact an Embassy directly if one is seeking a non-immigrant visa to the USA. In the case of Immigrant visas (or pseudo-immigrant visas such as the K1 visa or the K3 Visa) an appointment for interview is generally made after the Embassy or Consulate receives the prospective immigrant’s application package from the National Visa Center. In some cases, a Direct Consular Filing may be available to those prospective immigrants with an American Citizen spouse residing in the Consular District. In any case, many opt to consult an American lawyer prior to submitting an application or petition for a US Marriage Visa or a US fiance visa.
25th June 2010
Marriage Fraud as well as Immigration Fraud are a serious issues in the eyes of those agencies tasked with the job of adjudicating visa petitions and enforcing American law with regard to admission to the United States. With that in mind, it should be noted that domestically the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Service (USICE) has jurisdiction to enforce immigration regulations as well as decisions issued by Immigration courts. The following is a direct quote from a recently promulgated press release from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Service:
LOUISVILLE, Ky. – A U.S. citizen, who was paid to engage in a phony marriage with a Cambodian national to evade immigration laws, pleaded guilty Tuesday in federal court. The guilty plea resulted from an investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Justin Michael Martin, 25, of Georgetown, Ky., pleaded guilty June 22 in the Western District of Kentucky
to conspiracy to commit marriage fraud and marriage fraud. Martin admitted that between Jan. 1, 2000 and April 7, 2010, he knowingly reached an agreement with Yota Em, Phearoun Peter Em, aka Sophea Lim, and Michael Chanthou Chin to knowingly enter into a marriage to evade U.S. immigration laws. Martin admitted that Phearoun Peter Em drove Martin to a U.S.
Post Office in Lexington to apply for a U.S. passport, and that Phearoun Peter Em paid the passport
application fee. On June 17, 2004, Michael Chanthou Chin drove Martin and others to the Louisville airport. In exchange for a fee, Martin, Phearoun Peter Em, and others traveled from Kentucky to Cambodia. Once in Cambodia, Martin met with Cambodian national Yota Em and agreed to marry her to evade the immigration laws of the United States.
Photographs were taken of Martin and Yota Em during an engagement ceremony on June 25, 2004, and at other locations in Cambodia. While in Cambodia, members of the conspiracy paid for Martin’s lodging, food, transportation, sexual services from a Cambodian female, and other expenses.
On June 27, 2004, Martin returned to the United States and was met at the airport by Michael Chanthou Chin. Thereafter, certain immigration forms were completed by Martin and Yota Em, which falsely represented the marriage as genuine. On Sept. 27, 2005, Yota Em entered the United States using a K-1 (fiancée) visa. On March 5, 2007, Yota Em and Martin participated in a civil marriage ceremony in Lexington, knowing that the marriage was not entered into in good faith, was in exchange for something of value, and that the purpose of the marriage ceremony was to enable Yota Em to obtain U.S. permanent resident status in the United States. Phearoun Peter Em and Michael Chanthou Chin served as witnesses at the civil marriage ceremony.
Martin and Yota Em subsequently participated in a marriage interview with immigration officials in Louisville and falsely claimed that they married in good faith. Phearoun Peter Em acted as an interpreter for Yota Em. On June 30, 2009, Martin and Yota Em were divorced. The marriage between Martin and Yota Em was fraudulent and was entered into solely to evade U.S. immigration laws. Martin admitted that he was paid about $7,000 for participating in the marriage fraud scheme.
Defendant Yota Em is currently a fugitive. Anyone with information about her whereabouts should call 1-866-DHS-2ICE. The maximum potential penalties for Martin are 10 years’ imprisonment, a $500,000 fine, and supervised release for a period of six years.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Ann Claire Phillips, Western District of Kentucky, is prosecuting the case. For more information, visit www.ice.gov.
It is unfortunate to see this type of fraud occurring as it makes it increasingly difficult for bona fide couples to receive immigration benefits due to the fact that the American government must expend resources in an effort to catch fraudulent visa petitions and applications. As time and resources are spent investigating visa fraud, the overall visa process for all applicants could slow down. That said, Officers of the United States government should be commended for their diligence in apprehending the individuals involved in the conspiracy noted above. Fraud Prevention is a serious issue that must be dealt with in order to forestall an erosion of the integrity of the US Immigration system.
In recent weeks it has been announced that fees associated with the K1 visa and the K3 Visa are increasing. There is speculation that the funds derived from the increase in fees will be used to combat immigration fraud on a wider scale as the fee is being increased by the Department of State for those applications filed at a US Consulate or US Embassy abroad. Many feel that the funds will likely be used to increase the resources available to each Fraud Prevention Unit attached to US Missions overseas. Hopefully, by increasing resources available to Fraud Prevention Units outside of the USA, there will be fewer people entering the United States illegally based upon sham relationships.
18th June 2010
Frequently this author uses this blog to post accurate processing time estimates for the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) Centers in the United States. USCIS is a key agency tasked with adjudicating Immigration petitions prior to possible Consular adjudication at a US Embassy or US Consulate abroad.
The following was quoted from the USCIS website on June 18, 2010. These are the current processing time estimates for the USCIS service center in California:
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 | November 09, 2005 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | U.S. citizen filing for a married son or daughter over 21 | June 23, 2002 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | U.S. citizen filing for a brother or sister | September 02, 2001 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | Permanent resident filling for a spouse or child under 21 | January 02, 2009 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | Permanent resident filling for an unmarried son or daughter over 21 | November 16, 2003 |
I-131 | Application for Travel Document | All other applicants for advance parole | 3 Months |
I-129 | Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker | E – Treaty traders and investors | 2 Months |
---|---|---|---|
I-129 | Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker | L – Intracompany transfers | 1 Months |
The following are estimated processing times for the USCIS Service Center in Vermont:
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 22, 2009 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | U.S. citizen filing for a married son or daughter over 21 | July 13, 2009 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | U.S. citizen filing for a brother or sister | 5 Months |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | Permanent resident filling for a spouse or child under 21 | December 03, 2008 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | Permanent resident filling for an unmarried son or daughter over 21 | August 03, 2009 |
I-131 | Application for Travel Document | Permanent resident applying for a re-entry permit | 3 Months |
I-131 | Application for Travel Document | Refugee or asylee applying for a refugee travel document | 3 Months |
I-129 | Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker | E – Treaty traders and investors | 2 Months |
---|---|---|---|
I-129 | Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker | L – Intracompany transfers | 1 Months |
I-129 | Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker | Blanket L | 2 Months |
Those interested in bringing a foreign loved one to the United States on a K1 visa, K3 Visa, CR1 visa, or IR visa are advised to remember that the above processing time estimates do not take into account special circumstances, Consular Processing, I-601 waiver adjudication, or I-212 waiver adjudication. Therefore, those interested in obtaining a US visa are wise to consult a US Immigration lawyer prior to making any decisions as different visa categories can process faster relative to other categories.
Due to recent unrest in the Kingdom of Thailand, those processing through that Consular Post may find that it takes a bit longer to get an appointment compared to more tranquil periods. However, it should be noted that the US Embassy in Thailand has diligently worked to clear the backlog caused by the recent Embassy closure and processing is getting back to a state of relative normality.
For further information please see: US Visa Thailand.
15th June 2010
Holiday Closing Schedule for U.S. Embassy Dhaka, Bangladesh
Posted by : admin
Frequently on this blog the author tries to post information that may be of relevance to future visa seekers. Below is a schedule of the holidays quoted from the website of the US Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh:
2010 Mission Holiday Schedule Following is the Holiday Schedule for 2010 that will be observed by all U.S. Government agencies in Bangladesh.
HOLIDAYS DATES MISSION CLOSED New Year’s Day American December 31, 2009 Thursday Martin Luther King’s Birthday American January 17 Sunday+ Washington’s Birthday American February 14 Sunday+ Martyr’s Day (Int’l Language Day) Bangladeshi February 21 Sunday Bengali New Year’s Day Bangladeshi April 14 Wednesday Buddha Purnima# Bangladeshi May 27 Thursday# Memorial Day American May 30 Sunday+ Independence Day American July 4 Sunday Shab-e-Barat* Bangladeshi July 28 Wednesday* Labor Day American September 5 Sunday+ Shab-e-Quadr* Bangladeshi September 7 Tuesday* Eid-ul-Fitr* Bangladeshi September 12 Sunday* Columbus Day American October 10 Sunday+ Durga Puja# Bangladeshi October 17 Sunday# Veterans Day American November 11 Thursday Eid-ul-Azha* Bangladeshi November 17 & 18 Wednesday* & Thursday Thanksgiving Day American November 25 Thursday Victory Day Bangladeshi December 16 Thursday Christmas Day American December 26 Sunday+ Please note that, although the Bangladesh Government observes more Bangladeshi holidays than those noted above, only these will be observed for purposes of closing the Embassy.
Notes: (*) Date subject to appearance of the moon. (#) Date subject to change as the religious pundits select an auspicious date based the zodiac, position of star, moon or other celestial bodies.
(+) American holidays that normally fall on Friday, Saturday or Monday will be observed on the following or preceding workday, due to Sunday-Thursday work week in Bangladesh.
For those with business at any US Embassy or US Consulate overseas it is prudent to note that local events on the ground can have a tremendous impact upon US Embassies and Consulates as staff are generally not required to come to the Post and the Post will cease operation under special circumstances. Therefore, those who must travel to a US Embassy to visit American Citizen Services or the Visa Unit are well advised to call-ahead in order to be certain that the Post is open.
In Consular Processing matters, Consular closures can delay the visa process. That said, those who still have a case pending with USCIS need to be less concerned with the Embassy’s holiday closing schedule and more immediately concerned with the current USCIS processing times. As the US Family Visa process is bifurcated it is wise to note that three major agencies are involved in the adjudication of US visa cases: USCIS, the National Visa Center, and the US Embassy with appropriate jurisdiction over the Beneficiary. Therefore, those seeking answers as to why the process is delayed would be wise to note which agency is currently in possession of the petition or application.
With regard to processing of certain visa categories, recent Department of State fee increases could have an effect upon the overall immigration process. This is of special importance for those seeking a K1 visa or a K3 Visa.
For further related information please see: US Visa Thailand or US fiance visa.
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.