
Integrity Legal
- Legal Blog
- Integrity Legal Home
- Thai Visa
- Company in Thailand
- Real Estate Thailand
- US Visa
- Contact Us
Archive for the ‘US Tourist Visa’ Category
3rd November 2009
US Visa for Thai Fiance or Husband of an American Fiancee or Wife
Posted by : admin
Although this blog primarily focuses upon United States immigration for couples, we sometimes overlook the fact that the Petitioner may be a woman and the Beneficiary may be a man. Many American women in Thailand meet and fall in love with Thai men. Eventually the US Citizen must return to America and the couple begins to research options for the Thai national’s entrance into the USA.
One of the first visa categories that many couples look at is the category B2 visa also known as the tourist visa. Unfortunately, as in situations with an American man and a Thai lady, the US Embassy in Bangkok is reluctant to issue such visas to those with an American girlfriend, fiancee, or spouse because the relationship itself constitutes a “strong tie” to the US which is evidence bolstering the presumption of immigrant intent under 214(b) of the United States Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Many tourist visas sought for Thai loved ones of US Citizens are denied under the above section of the INA.
Fortunately, the US fiance visa may be a possibility for the Thai-American couple as the US citizen fiancee could sponsor the Thai fiance for a K1 visa. This visa would allow the Thai man to come to the USA for 90 days. After arrival, the couple must marry and apply for adjustment of status so that the Thai man will be a lawful permanent resident in the United States. Should the couple not marry, then the Thai must leave the US before the 90 day period of lawful Immigration status ends. Generally, it takes between 6 and 7 months to process a K1 visa.
US marriage visas are also an option for the Thai-American couple. The usual method for receiving marriage visa benefits is for the Thai man to marry the American lady at a local Amphur office (Civil registrar office) in Thailand. Once the couple is legally married they will be eligible to apply for a CR-1 visa by filing an I-130 Immigration petition. It usually takes between 11 and 12 months for such a petition to be processed.
For those who wish to expedite the marriage visa process a K3 visa could be employed to shorten the processing time. It currently takes 8 months to process the supplemental I-129f petition for a K3. This type of visa requires the filing of two petitions. At this time, the K3 visa is probably not the best method of obtaining Immigration benefits because the K1 has a faster processing time and the CR1 visa does not require adjustment of status after entry.
All in all, the US Immigration process is basically the same regardless of each parties gender. That being said, US federal law (the Defense of Marriage Act) still requires that the petitioner and beneficiary be of the opposite sex.
11th October 2009
What is a Request for Evidence (RFE) from USCIS?
Posted by : admin
In a previous post, we discussed the initial submission of an application for a United States visa for a foreign loved one. In this post we will discuss what needs to be done in the event of a request for evidence from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS). After USCIS receives an American Citizen’s US Immigration application, they send out a receipt notice commonly referred to as Notice of Action 1, or NOA 1. In the vast majority of ultimately successful cases the Notice of Action 1 is followed by the Notice of Action 2 approval notice. However, there are cases where an adjudicating officer at USCIS requests further documentation. In most Requests for Evidence (RFE) the deficiency of evidence is based upon the fact that one or more of the documents was illegible. This is why clearly legible documentation should always be provided when submitting an application to USCIS.
In order to forestall receiving an RFE, many couples opt to retain an Immigration attorney to assist in the filing of a United States visa application. An experienced United States Immigration attorney can predict what the officers will wish to see in order to favorably adjudicate a petition. However, simply retaining an attorney will not guarantee that a Request For Evidence will not be made, but if an RFE is sent, then the attorney can handle it and deal with the documentary deficiency.
The RFE will specify which documents are either missing or illegible. After specifying the deficiency, the RFE will go on to state how the deficiency can be dealt with and the deadline the applicant and petitioner will have to remedy the problem by sending the requested documentation.
In a way, an RFE is similar to a 221g refusal from the United States Embassy. The reason these requests are similar is that both require that the applicant or petitioner provide further documentation before an approval will be granted. The major difference between these two requests is the fact that officers of the United States Department of State issue 221 g requests while officers of the United States Department of Homeland Security issue requests for evidence. In both cases, the documentation is requested usually in an effort to conduct due diligence to ensure that the Immigration benefit should be accorded to the beneficiary.
In K1 visa applications the adjudicating officer is usually requesting evidence that shows the bona fides of the relationship or the status of one of the parties. In K3 or CR1 visa applications, the officer is usually seeking evidence regarding the couple’s marital status or the status of the parties before the marriage occurred.
9th October 2009
The Doctrine of Consular Absolutism or Consular Nonreviewability
Posted by : admin
There are many misconceptions regarding the authority that officers at the United States Consulate in Thailand have. Many people mistakenly believe that legal concepts such as due process apply to matters going before US Consular officers. In reality, this is not the case. Consular officers have very broad powers when it comes to adjudicating applications for United States visas. There are laws on the books that Consular Officers must observe when determining whether or not a US visa should be issued, but when making factual determinations, the doctrine commonly referred to as Consular Absolutism applies to their decisions.
The Doctrine of Consular Absolutism basically states that the factual decisions of Consular Officers are not subject to appeal. This legal notion is also called Consular Nonreviewability. In the case of Bustamante v. Mukasey the 9th Circuit Court of appeals concisely summed up the limited scope of judicial review that will be granted with regard to a Consular decisions in visa matters:
“[A] U.S citizen raising a constitutional challenge to the denial of a visa is entitled to a limited judicial inquiry regarding the reason for the decision. As long as the reason given is facially legitimate and bona fide the decision will not be disturbed…”
Showing that a Consular Officer’s reason for their decision is facially illegitimate or not bona fide is extremely difficult, if not, practically impossible. As a result, their decisions regarding visa issuance are essentially final.
Many wonder why Consuls are accorded such broad powers. The reason these officers are granted this ability to make unappealable decisions is based upon the policy argument that a Consular Officer is in the absolute best position to adjudicate the facts of a given visa application. In a way, Consular officers and the Doctrine of Consular Absolutism are the first lines of defense when it comes to preventing the entry of unqualified aliens into the United States of America. They are also the first line of defense when it comes to determining fraud, misrepresentation, possible terrorist suspects, and facts which could result in a finding of legal inadmissibility. Therefore, Consular officers must be provided with the authority to deny visa applications that they find either suspicious or deficient.
This is why in visa cases involving family members it is very important to prove up the bona fides of the underlying relationship. A K1 visa application is based upon a relationship between a US Citizen and a foreign national. Proving the bona fides of this relationship can be crucial to a favorable decision. This is also true for marriage visas such as the K3 visa and the CR1 visa.
Although, some have questioned the wisdom of granting such broad powers the prerogatives exercised by Consular officers are not abused as those in the Consular Corps perform their duties efficiently, courteously, and thoughtfully. That being said, there are cases where the applicant must be denied for factual reasons. The only way to facilitate this necessity is to provide Consular Officers with a wide degree of discretion in adjudicating visa applications.
Another very valid policy argument for the retention of the Doctrine of Consular Absolutism (Consular Nonreviewability) is based upon the notion that allowing for an appeals process in US visa cases would create a tremendous administrative burden upon the Department of State specifically and the United States government generally. Therefore, it is unlikely that this situation will change in the near future.
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.
10th September 2009
Thailand Immigration Officials To Scrutinize Tourist Visa Applicants
Posted by : admin
In an apparent effort to deal with a are number of foreign nationals using Thai Tourist visas for unintended purposes, the authorities at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are instructing Consular Officials at Royal Thai Embassies and Consulates to heavily scrutinize applicants for tourist visas. This edict seems especially targeted at Consulates and Embassies in the Southeast Asia region. Thaivisa.com is covering the story and quotes the edict directly:
“As there has been a number of visa applicants having entered Thailand via tourist visa and misused it to illegally seek employment during their stay and, upon its expiry, sought to re-apply their tourist visas at the Royal Thai Embassy or the Royal Thai Consulate in neighboring countries, requests for visa renewal by such applicants are subject to rejection as their applications are not based on tourism motive, but to continue their illegal employment, which is unlawful.
This is in accordance with the Immigration Act, B.B. 2552 which stipulates that visa applicants are required to clearly express their real purpose of visiting Thailand. Should the case be found that the applicant’s real intention were concealed, the application will be rejected.
Please be informed that the intention of applicants to repeatedly depart and re-enter Thailand via tourist visa issued by the Royal Thai Embassy or the Royal Thai Consulate in neighboring countries in recent years upon its expiry, is considered as concealment of real purpose of visiting Thailand. Thus their visas applications will be rejected.”
Unlike the Thai O visa and the Thai Business visa, the Thai Tourist visa is not designed for those who wish to work in the Kingdom. One present on a tourist visa is not entitled to apply for a Thai work permit. Due to this restriction, many foreigners opt to stay in Thailand and work illegally or “off the books.” Although tolerated at one time, this practice is viewed with increasing animosity by Thai Immigration officials particularly since the world wide economic downturn.
Thailand’s policy regarding this practice is similar to Section 214b of the United States Immigration and Nationality Act. This statute creates the presumption that those entering the United States on a non-immigrant visa, like a US Tourist visa, are in fact intending immigrants. United States Consular officers often reject tourist visa applicants because they cannot demonstrate true “tourist intention,” meaning that they do not have sufficiently strong ties to a country outside of the US which would compel them to depart the United States. Working in the United States on a tourist visa without work authorization is also considered to be a major violation of non-immigrant status (although not a ground of inadmissibility). Thailand seems like it is beginning to tighten up immigration protocols and coincidentally these measures are making the system resemble the US Immigration system.
7th September 2009
Exclusion from the United States under INA section 212(a)(7)
Posted by : admin
Under Section 214b of the Immigration and Nationality Act, a Consular officer can deny a non-immigrant visa (J1, F1, B1, B2) if they believe that the foreign applicant has not overcome the statutory presumption that they are actually an intending immigrant. In some cases, a consular officer may grant a tourist visa application, but the foreign national will be refused entry upon arrival in the United States of America.
How can a foreign national be granted a visa and still be denied entry to the United States? There is a common misconception that visa application approval creates a “right” to enter the United States of America. In fact, Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) Officers have the discretion to turn away alien nationals if they believe that there is a ground of excludability. If a CBP officer reasonably believes that an ostensible non-immigrant actually has immigrant intent, then they have the right to deny entry and it is further within the officer’s discretion to use expedited deportation to remove the prospective entrant.
The following paraphrases the INA:
According to section 212(a)(7)(A)(i) of the United States Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), any immigrant who, at the time of application for admission:
is not in possession of a valid unexpired immigrant visa, reentry permit, border crossing identification card, or other valid entry document required by the Immigration and Nationality Act, and a valid unexpired passport, or other suitable travel document, or document of identity and nationality if such document is required under the INS regulations, or whose visa has been issued without compliance with the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act is excludable [from the United States].
A waiver is available under INA §212(k) where the Attorney General is satisfied that the exclusion was not known to, and could not have been ascertained by the exercise of reasonable diligence by, the immigrant before the time of departure of the vessel or aircraft from the last port outside the United States and outside foreign contiguous territory or, in the case of an immigrant coming from foreign contiguous territory, before the time of the immigrant’s application for admission.
The powers of CBP officers described above illustrate the reason for seeking a proper visa rather than attempting to circumvent the Immigration rules. For example, there are some Americans who have a Thai loved one and they wish to bring them to the USA for the purpose of marriage and adjustment of status to lawful permanent residence. Generally a K1 visa (also known as a fiancee visa) would be the proper travel document for this purpose. However, some opt to pursue a US Tourist visa because the K1 visa has a processing time of approximately 6-7 months whereas a tourist visa generally takes a few weeks to acquire if the application is approved. Even if the visa application is approved, denial at the port of entry poses the risk of expedited deportation as well as the underlying monetary loss due to the fruitless visa application as well as travel expenses to get to the port of entry and be turned away. Removal from the United States can later be used to bar admission particularly if an Immigration officer finds that the entrant was intentionally misrepresenting themselves. In a situation such as this, the only way to remedy the inadmissibility could be the use of an I601 waiver.
Entry denial does not automatically lead to expedited deportation, the CBP officer has the discretion to allow the prospective entrant to withdraw their request for entry and leave at their own expense, but improper usage of non-immigrant visas does include the inherent risk of removal and those seeking entry to United States of America should bear this in mind when researching US Immigration issues.
6th September 2009
US Visa Denial under 214b of the Immigration and Nationality Act
Posted by : admin
Being denied for a visa to the United States of America is certainly not something that people researching the immigration process wish to think about. However, visa denials do occur and by understanding the reasons for denial it may allow prospective immigrants to make more informed decisions regarding their immigration strategy.
When it comes to American Family Immigration a common miscalculation involves applying for a US Tourist Visa on behalf of a foreign loved one. For example, if an American Citizen has a Thai fiancee and he attempts to assist in obtaining a US Tourist Visa for her, it will very likely result in a denial of the visa application. This is not due to some sort of malevolent feeling on the part of the United States Consular Officers, but it is rooted in American Immigration law.
It is probably best to simple quote the US Department of State website:
“Section 214(b) is part of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). It states:
‘Every alien shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he establishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of application for admission, that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant status…’
To qualify for a visitor or student visa, an applicant must meet the requirements of sections 101(a)(15)(B) or (F) of the INA respectively. Failure to do so will result in a refusal of a visa under INA 214(b). The most frequent basis for such a refusal concerns the requirement that the prospective visitor or student possess a residence abroad he/she has no intention of abandoning. Applicants prove the existence of such residence by demonstrating that they have ties abroad that would compel them to leave the U.S. at the end of the temporary stay. The law places this burden of proof on the applicant.”
Overcoming the presumption of immigrant intent has always been a somewhat major obstacle, but visa denials under this section of the law became more prevalent after the tragedy of September 11, 2001. After 9/11, there were some changes made in the way that non-immigrant visas were processed. A particularly critical change was the requirement that the applicant for a United States tourist visa be interviewed in person. This requirement, combined with increased scrutiny and heightened security concerns lead to more Tourist visa denials. In many cases, the denials were based upon section 214 (b) because the applicants failed to show that they were going to return to their home country, or, at the very least, leave the USA.
Where the foreign applicant is a loved one of a US Citizen, particularly where the Citizen primarily resides in the USA, it is unlikely that the tourist visa application will be approved unless that applicant can show sufficiently “strong ties,” to their home country. However, to forestall needlessly wasting of time and resources, it may be wise for a couple to look into the prospect of submitting a K1 visa application or seek to obtain a K3 visa. The K1 visa is a travel document which allows a temporary stay in the United States, but leaves room under the Doctrine of Dual Intent to allow for the visa holder to adjust status to US permanent residence.
6th September 2009
American Visas, Immigration, and the Dual Intent Doctrine
Posted by : admin
For those entering the United States of America on a non-immigrant visa, there is generally a requirement that the entrant have non-immigrant intent. This means that the person entering the country must intend to simply remain on a temporary basis and not have the intention to reside in the United States permanently. United States Visas that require non-immigrant intent include the US Tourist Visa, the F1 Student Visa, and the J1 Exchange Visitor Visa. For each of these categories, the prospective entrant could be denied access to the United States either by visa denial or entry denial at the United States Embassy in Bangkok or the port of entry in the USA. Due to the risk of visa denial or entry denial, it is always recommended to apply for a visa that comports to the applicant’s true intentions.
Conversely, it may be unwise to apply for an immigrant visa if the parties true intentions do not actually involve residing in the United States. In this situation, the issue of intent is somewhat more fluid, but it is still advisable that the parties have a bona fide intention to reside in the USA.
With both of these issues in mind, there is something of a “middle path,” with regard to United States Immigration. This middle path is the doctrine of dual intent. This doctrine is a legal concept that deals with the fact that there are some cases where a US Visa must permit foreign nationals to be present temporarily in the United States of America in legal status and still have immigrant intent. The doctrine was promulgated due to practical necessity as there are situations in which aliens come to live and work in the USA on temporary visas, but they themselves wish to eventually obtain lawful permanent residence. United States Immigration authorities and experts have come to recognize that there are certain situations where this seemingly paradoxical situation must be accepted and, to a certain extent, encouraged.
An example of a commonly sought visa category in Thailand, is the K1 fiance visa. The K1 is a non-immigrant visa, but the alien entering the US on this visa is generally doing so in order to: reunite with their fiance(e), marry, and adjust status to permanent residence. Therefore, the K1 visa is essentially a dual intent visa as it only allows for a 30 day temporary stay, but provides the opportunity to acquire US permanent residence.
To some extent, the K3 visa is a dual intent travel document as it is technically a non-immigrant visa, but once in the United States, the visa holder must eventually adjust status as the K3 does not confer lawful permanent residence. Usage of the K3 has declined in recent years as visa processing times have decreased for immigrant visas and increased slightly for K3 visas.
L1 visas as well as H1-B work visas are further examples of temporary visas which allow for dual intent. Although, these categories are employment based visas.
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.