
Integrity Legal
- Legal Blog
- Integrity Legal Home
- Thai Visa
- Company in Thailand
- Real Estate Thailand
- US Visa
- Contact Us
Archive for the ‘US Embassy Thailand’ Category
13th May 2010
The following message was posted on the website of the United States Embassy in the Kingdom of Thailand:
Warden Message: Embassy Closed Friday, May 14; Update on Possible Outages in Bangkok
(May 13, 2010) This warden message alerts U.S. citizens traveling to and residing in Thailand that the Royal Thai Government through the Center for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) has announced its plans to close off the demonstration area at the Ratchaprasong rally site in an attempt to disperse the protesters. We understand that beginning today, May 13, at 6:00 p.m., authorities will take the following measures:
–limit transportation services, including the BTS Skytrain, MRTA, canal routes, and possibly bus routes.
–set up check points at all access routes to control and limit access to the rally site. For details on what routes may be affected, please refer to local media.
–cut off electricity, water, and telephone to the rally site and possibly surrounding areas. It is currently unclear how large an area will be affected. It is also unclear how the UDD will respond.
The U.S. Embassy, including visa operations, will be closed tomorrow, Friday, May 14. American Citizen Services (ACS) will be available for emergencies only. If at all possible, the U.S. Embassy recommends against coming to this area on May 14. If U.S. citizens currently have appointments with ACS for May 14, you may go online or call us at 02-205-4049 to reschedule.
U.S. citizens should avoid travel to and lodging in this area and the areas in and around all demonstrations, if possible. If U.S. citizens must travel to these areas, they should exercise special caution and remain vigilant with regard to their personal security. U.S. Embassy personnel who live around this area have been given the option to relocate to housing outside of the affected area until the situation is resolved. U.S. citizens are reminded to exercise caution and vigilance at all times.
The United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (aka UDD or “red-shirts”) continues to demonstrate in central Bangkok. The UDD may change or expand their demonstration locations at any time. Various other groups are engaging in pro-government or counter-demonstrations. There have been several clashes between the security forces and the UDD and other demonstrators. These clashes may escalate with no warning. For areas currently affected by demonstrations, please refer to local media. These demonstrations are expected to continue in Bangkok indefinitely.
U.S. citizens are reminded that even demonstrations intended to be peaceful can turn confrontational and escalate into violence with little or no warning. U.S. citizens are urged to avoid the areas that may be targeted for demonstrations and to exercise caution in their movements around Bangkok.
The Department strongly encourages U.S. citizens in Thailand to register with the Consular Section of the U.S. Embassy in Bangkok or through the State Department’s travel registration website. For information on general crime and security issues, U.S. citizens may also consult the Department of State’s Country Specific Information for Thailand and the Worldwide Caution, located at the Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs website. U.S. citizens may also obtain up-to-date information on security conditions by calling 1-888-407-4747 from the United States and Canada, or 202-501-4444 from overseas.
The American Citizen Services section of the U.S. Embassy Bangkok is located at 95 Wireless Road, Bangkok 10330, Thailand. The American Citizen Services Unit of the U.S. Embassy can be reached by calling 66-2-205-4049 and by e-mail at [email protected]. The emergency after-hours telephone number is 66-2-205-4000.
The U.S. Consulate General in Chiang Mai is located at 387 Wichayanond Road in Chiang Mai. The American Citizen Services Unit of the Consulate General can be reached by calling 66-53-107-777 and by e-mail at [email protected]. The after-hours emergency telephone number is 66-81-881-1878.
For information about attorney assistance with Consular Processing in visa matters please see other pages on this website or click here: US Embassy Thailand or US Embassy.
4th May 2010
ในกระทู้ก่อนๆ เราได้พูดกันถึงเรื่องกฎภายในของ NVC ที่เปลี่ยนไป NVC ประกาศว่าให้มีผลตั้งแต่ วันที่ 1 กุมภาพันธ์ 2553 NVC จะไม่ดำเนินการเกี่ยวกับคำขอ I 129F ที่เกี่ยวกับวีซ่าคู่สมรสอีกต่อไปหากว่า คำขอ I-130 มาถึง NVC ก่อนหรือพร้อมกับคำขอ I 129F มีคนที่สงสัยว่าจะมีผลต่อผู้ขอวีซ่าอย่างไร สำหรับคนที่จะขอวีซ่า เค ทรี ผลของประกาศนี้สำคัญมากเพราะในหลายๆเคส NVC จะเรียกให้ผู้ที่ต้องการขอวีซ่าคู่สมรสถาวรขอวีซ่าคู่สมรสเช่น IR1 หรือ CR1 แทนที่จะเป็นวีซ่าทางด่วนแบบ เค ทรี อย่างไรก็ตามมีบางคนข้องใจว่าเรื่องนี้จะมีผลต่อวีซ่าคู่หมั้นอย่างไร
เพื่อขอวีซ่าคู่หมั้น บุคคลสัญชาติอเมริกันต้องยื่นคำขอ I-129F สำหรับวีซ่าเค วัน เมื่อคำขอได้รับการอนุมัติแล้ว จะถูกส่งต่อไปยัง NVC เพื่อตรวจสอบทางความมั่นคง หลังจากที่ตรวจสอบเสร็จเรียบร้อย จะถูกส่งต่อไปยังสถานทูตสหรัฐหรือกงสุลสหรัฐที่มีเขตอำนาจ ซึ่งก็อาจจะมีความสับสนเกิดขึ้นเนื่องจากบางคนอาจจะเข้าใจว่าคำขอ I 129F นั้นถูกยกเลิกสำหรับกรณีวีซ่าคู่หมั้นด้วย ซึ่งเรื่องนี้ไม่เป็นความจริงเนื่องจากการยกเลิกคำขอ I 129F นั้นเกิดขึ้นเฉพาะกับกรณีวีซ่า เค ทรี ไม่ใช่ วีซ่าเค วัน การเปลี่ยนแปลงที่ว่าไม่มีผลกับการขอวีซ่าเควันแต่อย่างใดเพราะกฎนี้มีขึ้นเพื่อเปลี่ยนแปลงการขอวีซ่าเค ทรี โดยเฉพาะ
ข้อดีของการพัฒนาในครั้งนี้ก็คือ NVC สามารถนำทรัพยากรบุคคลที่ดูแลเรื่องคำขอ I 129F สำหรับวีซ่าเค ทรี มาใช้ดูแลวีซ่าถาวรหรือวีซ่าคู่หมั้นก็เป็นได้ นั้นหมายความว่า ในความคิดเห็นของผู้เขียนนั้น ขั้นตอนการดำเนินการของวีซ่า เค วันนั้นค่อนข้างมีประสิทธิภาพยู่แล้ว และ NVC มักใช้เวลาไม่นานในการดำเนินการวีซ่าเค วัน ในเคสส่วนใหญ่ที่ดำเนินการโดยสถานทูตสหรัฐ ประจำประเทศไทย จะมีระยะเวลาการรอประมาณ 2 สัปดาห์ระหว่างที่ คำขอ I 129F ได้รับอนุมัติแล้วโดย USCIS และถูกส่งต่อจาก NVC มายังสถานทูต สำหรับคนทั่วๆไปก็เป็นระยะเวลาที่รอได้ และในกรณีวีซ่าถาวร ขั้นตอน NVC อาจจะนานขึ้นนิดหน่อยเนื่องจาก NVC ต้องการเอกสารมากขึ้นสำหรับวีซ่าถาวร เมื่อเทียบกับวีซ่าไม่อพยพ
For more information in English please see K1 visa or Fiance Visa Thailand.
2nd May 2010
President Obama Makes Statement On US Immigration Reform
Posted by : admin
The issue of Comprehensive Immigration Reform seems to be more hotly debated as the mid-term Congressional elections in the United States approach. Recently, President Barack Obama was quoted as saying:
What has become increasingly clear is that we can no longer wait to fix our broken immigration system, which Democrats and Republicans alike agree doesn’t work. It’s unacceptable to have 11 million people in the United States who are living here illegally and outside of the system. I have repeatedly said that there are some essential components that must be in immigration legislation. It must call for stronger border security measures, tougher penalties for employers who hire illegal immigrants and clearer rules for controlling future immigration. And it must require those who are here illegally to get right with the law, pay penalties and taxes, learn English, pass criminal background checks and admit responsibility before they are allowed to get in line and eventually earn citizenship. The outline presented today includes many of these elements. The next critical step is to iron out the details of a bill. We welcome that discussion, and my Administration will play an active role in engaging partners on both sides of the aisle to work toward a bipartisan solution that is based on the fundamental concept of accountability that the American people expect and deserve.
Many argue that the United States Immigration system needs to be modified as it is proving to be too inflexible when it comes to dealing with some of the important immigration problems of the day. A case in point is the debate on Same Sex US Immigration benefits for bi-national couples. At present, same-sex bi-national couples cannot receive the same family immigration benefits as different sex couples due to provisions in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). In short these couples cannot receive a same sex marriage visa. Many hope that by placing specific legislative language akin to the provisions of the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) into the Comprehensive Immigration bill this policy of providing disproportionate benefits will come to an end.
Overall, the current immigration system has improved for those seeking immediate relative immigration benefits (IR1, CR1, IR2, etc). For example, the National Visa Center has begun administratively closing K3 Visa applications as the need for such expedited travel documents is felt to be no longer necessary for those seeking immigrant benefits since USCIS no longer has a high backlog for such petitions. The K1 visa is still processing in the same manner as it has in the past. However, some of the preference petition categories are still processing quite slowly. Also, this brief assessment does not look at employment based immigration issues associated with visa categories such as the L1 visa and the E2 visa nor does it begin to tackle to issue of undocumented workers and immigrants in the USA.
For further information on this issue please see: Fiance Visa Thailand.
1st May 2010
On this blog, we try to provide up to date information regarding the processing time estimates of certain family based, and in limited instances non-family based, United States Immigration Petitions.
Below are the current processing time estimates from the USCIS Service Center in California as of February 28, 2010:
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 09, 2005 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | U.S. citizen filing for a married son or daughter over 21 | May 24, 2002 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | U.S. citizen filing for a brother or sister | March 02, 2001 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | Permanent resident filling for a spouse or child under 21 | June 02, 2007 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | Permanent resident filling for an unmarried son or daughter over 21 | March 02, 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 Month |
The following are processing time estimates for the USCIS Vermont Service Center as of February 28, 2010:
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 | February 13, 2009 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | U.S. citizen filing for a married son or daughter over 21 | January 23, 2009 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | U.S. citizen filing for a brother or sister | January 16, 2009 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | Permanent resident filling for a spouse or child under 21 | November 05, 2008 |
I-130 | Petition for Alien Relative | Permanent resident filling for an unmarried son or daughter over 21 | February 27, 2009 |
I-131 | Application for Travel Document | All other applicants for advance parole | 3 Months |
I-129 | Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker | L – Intracompany transfers | 1 Month |
---|
These estimates should not be viewed as accurate for each individual case as each case is unique and some cases take more time to process through the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) and others may take considerably little time to process through the Service Center. In any case, the assistance of a US Visa Lawyer can be helpful to clients as an authorized representative is entitled to correspond with USCIS on behalf of clients and can thereby streamline the overall visa process.
It should be noted that these estimates do not include the time that it takes to get the case processed through a US Embassy or US Consulate overseas. For those processing a Thai case, it usually takes about 6-8 weeks to process through the US Embassy Thailand.
For further information please see: Fiance Visa Thailand.
30th April 2010
US Lawyer Thailand: Confidentiality Issues
Posted by : admin
Repeatedly, this author uses this blog as a platform to try to educate the public regarding the US visa process and the problems that can arise during that process. In many cases, people are simply unaware of the rules regarding US visa issuance and this blog attempts to provide relevant information that readers may find beneficial. That being said, another frequently discussed topic is the unauthorized practice of law by “visa companies” and “visa agents” or those claiming to be American attorneys. This is not simply a tirade against such practices, but is intended to provide information regarding the detrimental impact that these individuals can have upon the interests of their “clients”.
Under section 292.1 of the United States Code of Federal Regulations a licensed attorney is entitled to represent clients before the United States Department of Homeland Security, specifically the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) which is tasked with adjudicating US visa petitions. Many are unaware of the fact that those who assist individuals in preparing visa petitions are engaging in the unauthorized practice of law if they are not: licensed to practice law in at least one US jurisdiction while being eligible to practice law in all US jurisdictions or certified by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).
Licensure is no small matter, especially for those individuals who are “represented” by those claiming to be attorneys who are not, in fact, licensed. For example, if an American talks to an unlicensed individual about sensitive matters, then such communications would not be confidential and also would not be protected under the attorney/client privilege. If one is communicating in confidence to a licensed attorney, then such communication is “out of bounds” for US Courts. However, the same communications with one who is unlicensed could be used as evidence in a US court proceeding. Therefore, licensure is extremely important particularly in US Immigration matters involving a legal ground of inadmissibility or an I-601 waiver as certain information could be very detrimental to clients’ interests and if imparted to a licensed American attorney would be confidential, but if imparted to an unlicensed “fly by night” operator such information could be used against the client at a later date.
For all of these reasons, when an American is outside of the USA it is always prudent to check the credentials of anyone claiming to be an attorney from the United States. An individual can provide adequate credentials if they can show their license to practice law before at least on State Supreme Court in the US, or a Federal license to practice law in the USA, or a license to practice law in one of the US territorial jurisdictions (Guam, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, etc). Anyone who refuses to provide any such credentials and yet still asserts that they are an American attorney should be avoided until proof of credentials can be provided.
For further information about US Immigration from Thailand please see: K1 Visa Thailand.
11th April 2010
US Embassy in Thailand Releases Statement About Recent Unrest
Posted by : admin
The following was posted on the website of the US Embassy in Thailand:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
For Immediate Release
April 10, 2010
2010/418
Statement by P.J. Crowley, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Public Affairs
“The United States deeply regrets the violence on the streets of Bangkok April 10, and the loss of life. Violence is not an acceptable means of resolving political differences. We call on the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) and the Thai security forces to show restraint going forward. The United States firmly believes both sides can and should work out disagreements peacefully through earnest negotiation. We once again stress the importance of all players in Thailand working to resolve differences in a way that strengthens democracy and rule of law. We strongly support the Thai nation and its people during this difficult period.” [Bold and Italics added]
10th April 2010
US Visa Denial: New Report Discusses Trends
Posted by : admin
Visa denial is generally something that most bi-national couples do not wish to discuss, but it is something that should be researched by the prospective visa petitioner as legal grounds of inadmissibility and the I-601 waiver process could be relevant to an individual couple’s Immigration petition and visa application.
In a recent report from the Congressional Research service (distributed by AILA) the issue of visa denial was discussed as the report looked at the reasons for denial and the overall trends in inadmissibility findings:
“Most LPR [Lawful Permanent Residence] petitioners who were excluded on §212(a) grounds from FY1994 through FY2004 were rejected because the Department of State (DOS) determined that the aliens were inadmissible as likely public charges. By FY2004, the proportion of public charge exclusions had fallen but remained the top basis for denial. The lack of proper labor certification was another leading ground for exclusion from FY1994 through FY2004. By FY2008, however, illegal presence and previous orders of removal from the United States was the leading ground.”
The finding of a “public charge” grounds of inadmissibility is related to the affidavit of support. A finding that an alien is likely to be a “public charge” stems from a finding that the sponsor does not have the requisite income and assets necessary to support the alien for whom benefits are being sought. The report goes further to note that Comprehensive Immigration Reform may tackle some of the issues associated with the trends in visa application denials:
“Legislation aimed at comprehensive immigration reform may take a fresh look at the grounds for excluding foreign nationals enacted over the past two decades. Expanding the grounds for inadmissibility, conversely, might be part of the legislative agenda among those who support more restrictive immigration reform policies.”
It is interesting to note that the Immigration system may become more stringent or more lax depending upon the mood of legislators with regard to the issue of immigration. That being said, a more detailed look at the current trends provides insight into the dynamics of the system as a whole:
“[M]ost LPR petitioners who were excluded on §212(a) grounds in FY1996 and FY2000 were rejected because the DOS determined that the aliens were inadmissible as likely public charges. In FY2004, the proportion of public charge exclusions had fallen, but remained the top basis for denial. The lack of proper labor certification was another leading ground for exclusion in FY1996, FY2000, FY2004, and FY2008. By FY2008, however, illegal presence and previous orders of removal from the United States had become the leading ground.”
It is interesting to note that unlawful presence and previous removal had become the leading grounds of inadmissibility cited by the year 2008. This would seem to support the anecdotal evidence and personal experience of this author as more and more prospective entrants to the US seem to be placed in expedited removal proceedings with greater frequency. Also, there seems to be an increasing trend of increasingly zealous enforcement of Immigration law in the USA as illegal aliens are placed in removal proceedings more frequently.
For further information about visa denial please see: K1 visa. For general information about US Immigration from Thailand please see: US Visa Thailand.
9th April 2010
To see related information in English please see: 221g.
ยังคงมีข้อสงสัยเกี่ยวกับการที่วีซ่าถูกปฏิเสธภายใต้มาตรา 221 (G ) สำหรับคำร้องขอวีซ่าจากประเทศไทย การปฏิเสธวีซ่าตามมาตรา 221 (G ) ก็คือการปฏิเสธเพื่อขอหลักฐานเพิ่มเติม เมื่อเจ้าหน้าที่กงสุลตัดสินใจว่าจะออกวีซ่าสหรัฐอเมริกาให้หรือไม่ ( ในการนี้ให้ดูเรื่อง วีซ่าคู่หมั้น K1, K3 หรือ วีซ่าคู่สมรส CR1 ) เจ้าหน้าที่จะทำการสืบเสาะข้อเท็จจริงเพื่อให้มั่นใจว่าผู้ขอวีซ่าเป็นบุคคลตามที่กล่าวอ้างจริง และจะเดินทางไปสหรัฐอเมริกาด้วยเหตุผลที่มีมูล ( ในกรณีเช่นนี้หมายความว่าต้องเป็นการเดินทางไปเพื่อวัตถุประสงค์ความสัมพันธ์ทางครอบครัวกับผู้ร้องสัณชาติอเมริกัน )
คู่รักบางคู่มีความกังวลใจเมื่อได้รับ แบบ 221 (G) และก็อาจจะเป็นเรื่องที่ไม่ค่อยสะดวกเท่าไหร่โดยเฉพาะกรณีที่ผู้ขอวีซ่ามาจากต่างจังหวัด ซึ่งก็เป็นปัญหาได้ หากว่าผู้ขอวีซ่ามีสำมะโนครัว (ทะเบียนบ้าน ) อยู่ต่างจังหวัดและเป็นการยากต่อการเดินทางกลับไป บ่อยครั้งที่เอกสารที่ถูกเรียกจะต้องออกโดยอำเภอที่ผู้ขอวีซ่ามีชื่ออยู่ในทะเบียนบ้าน แม้ว่าจะเป็นเรื่องปกติสำหรับสถานทูตที่จะออก คำร้องขอเอกสารเพิ่มเติมในลักษณะนี้ แต่ก็สามารถเป็นเรื่องลำบากสำหรับผู้ขอวีซ่าชาวไทยที่จะไปนำเอกสารที่จำเป็นนั้นมาให้ได้
การปฏิเสธวีซ่าภายใต้มาตรา 221 (g) นี้โดยทั่วไปแล้วจะให้เวลาผู้ขอวีซ่า 1 ปีในการหาเอกสารที่ได้รับการร้องขอก่อนที่สถานทูตจะทำการทำลายไฟล์ของคุณ หากไม่ปฏิบัติตามคำร้องขอนี้ ก็อาจจะทำให้คำร้องขอวีซ่าของคุณถูกยกเลิกและต้องเริ่มกระบวนการใหม่อีกครั้งหนึ่ง
เพื่อหลีกเลี่ยงการปฏิเสธวีซ่าภายใต้มาตรา 221 ( G) อาจจะเป็นการดีที่จะขอความช่วยเหลือจากทนายความด้านกฎหมายคนเข้าเมือง เพื่อป้องกันการปฏิเสธวีซ่าภายใต้มาตรา 221 ( G) แต่อย่างไรก็ตาม แม้ว่าจะได้มีการจ้างทนายความแล้ว คุณก็ยังคงสามารถถูกปฏิเสธวีซ่าภายใต้มาตรา 221 ( G) ได้ หากว่ามีเอกสารอื่นที่จำเป็นต้องแสดง เจ้าหน้าที่กงสุลมีอำนาจดุลพินิจอย่างกว้างขวางตามอำนาจเด็ดขาดของกงสุล ดังนั้น คำร้องขอเอกสารเพิ่มเติมโดยเจ้าหน้ากงสุลเป็นเรื่องที่คุณต้องให้การตอบรับคำร้องขอนั้นภายในเวลาที่กำหนดให้
7th April 2010
US Visa Denial: Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude
Posted by : admin
As this author has discussed in previous blog posts, one major reason for US visa denial is based upon a finding that a legal grounds of inadmissibility exists in a given case. One legal grounds of inadmissibility is based upon a finding by the Consular Officer that the applicant committed a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude (CIMT). That being said, at times it can be difficult to determine whether or not an individual’s prior actions would be considered a crime involving moral turpitude. The Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) provides some insight into what types of crimes are considered to be crimes involving moral turpitude, the following are excerpts from the FAM:
“9 FAM 40.21(a) N2.3-1 Crimes Committed Against
Property
(CT:VISA-1318; 09-24-2009)
a. Most crimes committed against property that involve moral turpitude
include the element of fraud. The act of fraud involves moral turpitude
whether it is aimed against individuals or government. Fraud generally
involves:
(1) Making false representation;
(2) Knowledge of such false representation by the perpetrator;
(3) Reliance on the false representation by the person defrauded;
(4) An intent to defraud; and
(5) The actual act of committing fraud”
Property Crimes are not the only activities that can be construed as crimes involving moral turpitude as criminal actions which violate or undermine governmental authority are also considered to be CIMT:
“9 FAM 40.21(a) N2.3-2 Crimes Committed Against
Governmental Authority
(CT:VISA-1318; 09-24-2009)
a. Crimes committed against governmental authority which fall within the
definition of moral turpitude include:
(1) Bribery;
(2) Counterfeiting;
(3) Fraud against revenue or other government functions;
(4) Mail fraud;
(5) Perjury;
(6) Harboring a fugitive from justice (with guilty knowledge); and
(7) Tax evasion (willful).”
The FAM also goes on to note the various activities that may not be considered CIMT. However, it is incumbent upon the adjudicating officer to examine the facts of a given case and make a decision as to whether the underlying actions that gave rise to a criminal conviction in fact constitutes a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude for purposes of visa issuance. If the officer decides that a CIMT was committed, then the visa application will likely be denied. Under the doctrine of Consular NonReviewability (also known as Consular Absolutism) this decision is not subject to appeal. However, the applicant make be able to overcome the visa denial by applying for, and obtaining, an I-601 waiver.
Of interest to some may be the recent Circuit Court decision which held:
“An order of removal from the United States was entered against Petitioner Armando Alvarez-Reynaga based on his felony conviction for receipt of a stolen vehicle in violation of section 496d(a) of the California Penal Code. His petition for review presents the questions of whether a conviction under that statute qualifies categorically as a conviction for an aggravated felony, and whether it qualifies categorically as a crime involving moral turpitude. We conclude that it qualifies as the first, but not the second. We deny the petition for review.”
As the law continues to evolve, so to does the definition of CIMT and the activities that are considered to be covered by the CIMT provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
For more information about US Visas from the Kingdom of Thailand please see: US Visa Thailand.
(Readers should be advised that the above does not constitute a full analysis of CIMT issues. Each application has its own unique set of facts and those facts must be analyzed on an individual basis in order to form a professional opinion.)
30th March 2010
US Embassy in Bangkok and WebChat With Visa Seekers
Posted by : admin
It is common knowledge that many people seek United States travel documents from the US Embassy Thailand. However, are those who have complex questions regarding United States Tourist visas and in many cases, these questions can only be answered by either an attorney or a Foreign Service Officer. Thanks to the internet, there are more and more opportunities for those with sought out knowledge to communicate with those who need specific questions answered. The website Thaivisa.com is reporting that the US Embassy in Bangkok has initiated a live chat program to allow the public to interact directly with Embassy personnel online:
“U.S. Embassy Bangkok Non-Immigrant Visa Webchat
Interested in visiting the U.S. as a tourist? Looking to study in the U.S.? If you have questions about non-immigrant visas to the U.S. here is your chance to ask! The U.S. Embassy Bangkok Consular Section will be online to answer questions about non-immigrant visa services for Thai citizens and residents of Thailand. Join us for this special webchat!
Date: Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Time: 6:00-7:00pm (Bangkok time)
To participate:
1. Go to https://statedept.connectsolutions.com/bangkok
2. Enter as a Guest (Type your name)
3. Submit your questions (We accept questions and comments in advance of, and at any time during the program)
We look forward to chatting with you then!
Please Note: At this time questions can be submitted in English only.”
Although this chat session has already occurred one should note that this is a terrific resource for those interested in a tourist visa as it allows for an applicant to have their inquiries answered in real time by one who is knowledgeable about US visa matters. It is interesting to note that the Thaivisa.com posting only makes reference to the the US Tourist Visa and not other visa categories. This is probably due to the fact that employment based visas such as the E2 visa or the L1 visa are granted after an assessment of the unique set of facts and issues in a given case so it would be difficult to discuss such visas through the internet. That being said, tourist visa adjudications are based upon the facts in the case, but judging an applicant’s likelihood of obtaining a US visa is often easier, compared to employment based cases, due to section 214(b) of the US Immigration and Nationality Act. Family based visa applications for visas such as the K1 visa, the K3 Visa, the IR1 visa and the CR1 Visa are also adjudicated based upon the facts of the case and in many cases the likelihood of ultimate approval is not easy to determine unless one delves deeply into the details of the case. This could explain why these types of applications do not appear to be the intended topic of discussion in the aforementioned live chat session.
Hopefully, this will become a regular addition to the already quality service provided by the US Embassy in Bangkok.
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.