
Integrity Legal
- Legal Blog
- Integrity Legal Home
- Thai Visa
- Company in Thailand
- Real Estate Thailand
- US Visa
- Contact Us
Archive for the ‘US Consulate Chiang Mai’ Category
14th November 2009
CDC seeks to take HPV off of Immigrant Vaccine Requirements
Posted by : admin
In a previous post on this blog we discussed how the Center for Disease Control, in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), is in the process of taking HIV off of the list of diseases that will bar entry into the USA. Recently, it has come to this author’s attention that the vaccine for the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) will no longer be a requirement for those seeking to immigrate to the United States of America. Under the current regulations, it is required that all applicants seeking an Immigrant visa, or a non-immigrant dual intent visa such as a K1 visa or K3 visa, are required to be vaccinated against HPV if they are under the age of 26 at the time of application. This requirement can lead to considerable expense for those wishing to obtain United States Immigration benefits.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), recently released information from the Final Notice on Criteria for Vaccination Requirements, the follow are excerpts from that notice:
“On April 8, 2009, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published a notice in the Federal Register (74 FR 15986) seeking public comment on proposed criteria that CDC intends to use to determine which vaccines recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for the general U.S. population should be required for immigrants seeking admission into the United States or seeking adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence. This final notice describes the criteria that CDC has adopted.”
The notice goes on to discuss the criteria that the CDC and US Immigration officials use to determine whether or not intending immigrants should be required to get a vaccination. After a detailed analysis of the guidelines, policy, and regulations the report concludes:
“Therefore, because HPV does not meet the adopted criteria, it will not be a required vaccine for immigrant and adjustment of status to permanent residence applicants.”
The proposed rule will likely be effective early in 2010. However, it should be noted that until the rule is finalized the current rules and regulations still stand. Therefore, those intending immigrant being interviewed at the time of this writing must still get the required HPV vaccination if they are under the prescribed age. Currently, this is not a requirement for tourist visas, student visas, and exchange visitor visas as such travel documents are classified as non-immigrant. Even though the K1 fiance visa and K3 marriage visa are technically non-immigrant visas they are treated as immigrant visas for the purposes of the aforementioned rule because these visas allow for dual non-immigrant and immigrant intent.
13th November 2009
USCIS to Accept Old G-28 Form “Until Further Notice”
Posted by : admin
In a previous post the issue of the G-28 Notice of Attorney Appearance was discussed. The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service had changed the form in order to update its contents to more accurately convey information regarding the exact nature of an attorney’s representation of a client before the various agencies under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security. Recently, this author has learned through the American Immigration Lawyers Association that USCIS will continue to accept the old form and will not reject an application simply for utilizing the previous form. To quote USCIS through AILA:
“U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that the previous version of the Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative (Form G-28) will be accepted until further notice… On Oct. 1, 2009, USCIS announced the publication of a new Form G-28 and provided a 30-day grace period, until Oct. 30, for accepting previous versions at the USCIS Lockbox facilities or USCIS Service Centers. USCIS encourages attorneys and accredited representatives to use the new Form G-28, however, USCIS will not reject filings of the previous Form G-28 version until further notice. This will allow law students who represent immigrants to use the previous form until changes can be made to the form to accommodate their unique situation.”
As stated previously, the submission of a G-28 puts the United States government (in the form of the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Cutoms and Border Protection, and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service) on notice that an attorney has officially entered their appearance in the case.
Also a G-28 is an effective way of determining if one is dealing with an actual attorney or simply working with a “visa company,” “visa agency,” or phony unlicensed “lawyer.” Unless the government is willing to correspond directly with one’s attorney it may be wise to seek representation elsewhere because this is an integral component of the Immigration attorney-client relationship.
Each and every US Embassy or US Consulate is under the jurisdiction of the US Department of State and not the Department of Homland Security. Therefore, a G-28 has no bearing on these organs of government, but the US Embassy will correspond with an attorney in matters pertaining to a visa application if the attorney is licensed to practice in the USA. That being said, generally the Embassies and Consulates will not deal with unlicensed so-called “lawyers,” and as a result, such an individual can be of little assistance in processing US visa applications.
6th November 2009
The Visa Waiver Program, 221g denials, and ESTA
Posted by : admin
The United States visa waiver program, not to be confused with an I-601 waiver, allows citizens from certain countries to enter the United States of American without obtaining a visa prior to arrival. In recent years the United States government has implemented ESTA, also known as: the Electronic System for Travel Authorization. ESTA requires that travelers wishing to enter the country on a visa waiver inform the US Immigration authorities prior to arrival so that a pre-screening can be conducted. The United States Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Service is tasked with monitoring those seeking travel clearances using the ESTA system. Recently it has been reported by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) that 221g denials must be reported in the ESTA form, to quote AILA directly:
“CBP recently informed AILA that it, after consultation with the Department of State (DOS), is classifying all §221(g) actions on visa applications as visa “denials.” Thus, Visa Waiver Program (VWP) applicants, who are subject to INA §221(g) refusals, should answer affirmatively in their ESTA applications that they have been denied a visa. This suggestion applies even if the reason for the refusal is due to consular administrative processing. If VWP travelers do not disclose such a “denial” on their ESTA applications or provide an update regarding such “denials,” they may have their ESTA registration rejected or be sent to secondary inspection and potentially refused entry when they apply for admission to the United States.”
This is important to note for those originating from a country participating in the US visa waiver program. For example, if the foreign fiancee of a US Citizen has been issued a 221g with regard to a K1 visa application, then that 221g must be disclosed as a denial on the ESTA form if said fiancee intends to visit the US and the foreign fiancee’s home country participates in this program.
As AILA’s article went on to point out, the Department of State does not even consider 221(g)’s to be outright denials,
Technically, the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) classifies a §221(g) action as a visa “refusal,” but DOS explicitly retains authority to “reactivate” the visa application upon receipt of required documents or completion of a government mandated administrative clearance. See 9 FAM 41.121 N2.4.
This situation is a classic example of two different government agencies taking a differing view of the same situation. The Department of State seems to view 221g refusals as administrative refusals to issue a visa without further documentation while the Department of Homeland Security seems to view such refusals as US visa denials that could be viewed as grounds for denying a person’s subsequent entry into the USA.
This issue will likely not be particularly problematic in the Kingdom of Thailand as Thailand is not a country participating in the visa waiver program, but for others around the world this issue could lead to problems entering the USA.
For those in this situation, it is always advisable to be honest, but it may be possible to explain the situation by answering “yes” to the question: Have you ever been denied a U.S. visa or entry? After answering in the affirmative there should be space to explain. Therefore, the applicant probably should note that the denial was: a 221(g), at the Embassy or Consulate (example: US Embassy Bangkok, US Consulate Chiang Mia, US Embassy Burma, etc.), and the reason for the “denial” (example: Embassy conducted administrative processing, Consulate requested further documentation, etc).
19th October 2009
The US Embassy in Yangon (Rangoon), Myanmar (Burma)
Posted by : admin
The United States has a somewhat tenuous relationship with the Union of Myanmar (also known as Burma). This is due to the fact that Myanmar has been a somewhat isolated nation since the early 1960′s. Prior to that, the country was a colony of the British and briefly a member of the British commonwealth. Burma (Myanmar) has had a very turbulent history as there was once a great deal of factional infighting culminating in a takeover by military generals. The country has since been under a system known as “The Burmese Way Of Socialism.” According to those in power, the military authorities are holding power in a sort of trust until such time as the country is ready for democracy.
The United States maintains an Embassy in Burma (Myanmar) in the country’s capital Rangoon (also known as Yangon). Interestingly, the Embassy maintains a American Center which is in a different location from the United States Embassy and the US Consular section in Yangon. This situation is not, in an of itself, uncommon. For example, the Consular Services Section of the US Embassy Bangkok is located across the street from the Embassy proper, that being said, it is still relatively close.
The United States Embassy in Yangon, Myanmar (Rangoon, Burma) as well as the Consular Services Section is located at:
110 University Ave, Kamayut Township, Rangoon, Burma
The American Center in Yangon is located at:
14, Tawwin Road, Dagon Township, Rangoon, Burma.
The office hours of the Consular Services Section are: 8:00 am to 4:30 pm Monday through Friday. Except for holidays.
Unlike the United States Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand, the post in Myanmar is not headed by an American Ambassador, but is instead headed by a Chargé d’Affaires.
Those seeking to obtain United States visas for loved ones living in Burma (Myanmar) will likely process through the United States Consulate in Yangon. In many cases, Burmese Nationals residing in Thailand may be able to enjoy the benefit of having their visa processed through the United States Embassy in Bangkok or the US Consulate in Chiang Mai depending upon the US visa category and the Burmese (Myanmar) national’s place of residence.
That being said, meeting the requirements for Consular jurisdiction in Thailand can be difficult for those with Burmese (Myanmar) Nationality. In some cases a K3 visa may be beneficial for those who wish to ensure a visa application will be processed in a certain jurisdiction. However, careful research and possibly the retention of expert immigration counsel may be necessary to properly determine where a US visa application will be adjudicated.
13th October 2009
I have lost my United States Passport in Thailand, what do I do?
Posted by : admin
The authors have noticed an upsurge of those asking about how to go about replacing a lost passport while traveling in the Kingdom of Thailand. This post is a brief overview of what needs to be done when one loses their United States Passport in Thailand.
In order to receive a new passport one must go to the American Citizen Services (ACS) section of the United States Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand. This office is located near the Consular Section of the US Embassy, in fact the two rooms are adjoining once one is inside the compound. It is wise to first make an ACS appointment by going to the US Embassy website here
In many cases, people do not plan to lose their travel documents so making an appointment may not be feasible. The United States Embassy website provides the following suggestion:
“When traveling, please remember to carry a photocopy of your passport separately from your passport. In the event of loss or theft, the copy will help facilitate issuance of an emergency passport.”
For those thinking of traveling, keep the above quote in mind as it can save a great deal of time at the Embassy.
At one time, the American Citizen Services Section in Bangkok, Thailand was considered to be one of the worst for customer service when compared against its counterparts in the region. However, over the past 5 years, this office has done a great deal to improve customer service and efficiency. It is now a very customer-friendly office that provides fast effective service. If an online appointment is set in advance then one could expect to be in and out in relatively short order, depending upon the service sought.
For those who lose their passport, they have the option of either applying for a new passport or applying for an emergency passport. Under limited circumstances, the Embassy will expeditiously issue Emergency Passports that have a very short validity period.
In order to obtain a new passport one will need to provide proof of citizenship such as a Naturalization Certificate, Certificate of Citizenship, a Birth Certificate, a Consular Report of Birth Abroad, or a Drivers License. Again, due to the likely unavailability of these documents it is always wise to have a copy of the previous passport.
Once the new travel document is issued, one needs to have their Thai Immigration entry stamps replicated in the new passport. Therefore, a trip to Thai Immigration will be necessary. For those with a long term Thai visa, the visa will need to be duplicated in the new passport.
For those in Northern Thailand, the American Citizen Services Unit at the United States Consulate-General in Chiang Mai also could assist with passport issuance. See their website here.
12th October 2009
What is USCIS Notice of Action 2 (NOA 2)?
Posted by : admin
For those researching the United States visa process a document called Notice of Action 2 is mentioned many times in relation to spouse and fiance visa applications. This post is a brief description of what Notice of Action 2 is and what it means for a pending application.
When a United States visa application is submitted the first piece of correspondence that arrives from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) Center is a receipt called Notice of Action 1 (NOA 1). This puts the petitioning party on notice that the application has been received by the USCIS Service Center. There are certain situations where the adjudicating officer decides that more information or evidence needs to be provided before the application can be properly adjudicated. In cases such as this, a Request for Evidence (also known as an RFE) will be issued and sent to the petitioner. However, in most cases, further evidence is not necessary and if the application is approved then Notice of Action 2 is sent to the petitioner. If the application is denied, then a notice will be sent to the petitioner as well.
Although not extremely common in cases involving visas for the family members of United States Citizens, USCIS denials can occur. Denials are usually the result of a petition that did not go far enough in showing that a bona fide relationship between Petitioner and Beneficiary existed at the time of the filing. Another common reason for denial is that the petitioner applied for the wrong type of visa. A common misconception in Thailand involves customary marriages and their effect upon a couple’s United States Immigration options. In Thailand, if a Thai marriage is not registered at the Civil Registrar’s office (Amphur), then the marriage is not legally binding and not recognized by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service as a basis for receiving US Immigration benefits. Therefore, if a couple who has only been married unofficially submits a petition for an IR1 visa, CR1 visa, or K3 visa then they will be denied because they do not meet the statutory requirements for visa issuance. However, the couple in this situation may be eligible for a K1 visa.
After USCIS issues Notice of Action 2, the petition will be sent to the National Visa Center. In cases involving Immigrant visas, the NVC holds the petition for a fairly long period of time. However, in cases where a K1 visa is being sought, the NVC does not hold the application for a long time. They will usually conduct a Security clearance and forward the file to the US Embassy, in cases involving Thai fiancees they will forward the application to the US Embassy in Bangkok. The United States Consulate General in Chiang Mai does not generally handle US Immigrant visa cases.
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.
10th October 2009
What is USCIS Notice of Action 1?
Posted by : admin
On this blog, we commonly make reference to Notice of Action 1 or NOA 1. In an effort to provide the most high quality repository of United States Immigration definitions for those seeking a US Visa from Thailand providing a brief overview of this official Immigration notice is required.
In many United States Immigration matters, particularly family Immigration cases from Thailand, the visa application must first receive approval from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS). This agency is one of many that reports to the Secretary of the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
When a couple opts to apply for a United States visa, they often apply for one of the following categories: CR1 visa, IR1 visa, K3 visa, or K1 visa. The CR1, IR1, and K3 are all United States Marriage visas while the K1 visa is a fiancee visa. All of these visas require USCIS pre-approval before a visa interview can be set. Conversely the B1 visa, B2 visa, F1 visa, and J1 visa are all non-immigrant visa categories (that do not permit dual intent) and therefore do not require USCIS pre-approval. It should be noted that the non-immigrant visa categories are much more difficult to acquire for loved ones of United States citizens due to a provision in the United States Immigration and Nationality Act called 214b. This provision creates a legal presumption that must be overcome by the foreign applicant before the visa will be issued.
When a United States Citizen files for a K1, K3, CR1, or IR1 visa they first file an application at a USCIS Service Center. There are two USCIS Service Centers that accept applications for the aforementioned visa categories and the petitioner’s residence will determine where the application should be filed. The petitioner will send in the application and upon receipt, the USCIS Service Center will generate a receipt referred to as Notice of Action 1 (or NOA1). This receipt will note the names of the Petitioner and Beneficiary as well as the date of receipt and the date the notice was generated. The receipt will also show a case number.
For those who retain the services of a US visa lawyer, a copy of Notice of Action 1 will be sent to the attorney provided the attorney submitted a G28 form with the application. Before retaining an attorney it is wise to make certain that a G28 form will be submitted because it is important to facilitating efficient visa processing. Fake lawyers and so-called visa agencies cannot represent clients before USCIS so it may be wise to inquire as to the credentials of any proposed representative. Unfortunately, in the Kingdom of Thailand, there are many unauthorized services masquerading as licensed US Immigration attorneys.
The Notice of Action 1 should not be confused with the initial letter sent from the US Embassy Thailand. This letter is commonly referred to a Packet 3 and is sent at a later phase of the US Immigration process.
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.
5th September 2009
Financial Requirements for Visas to the United States and Thailand
Posted by : admin
This blog has often compared and contrasted the difference between the Immigration procedures for obtainment of a US Visa and a Thai Visa. To further compare the two systems, this post will provide a brief overview of the financial requirements one must meet in order to obtain a visa to Thailand or the United States of America.
In order to sponsor a traveler to the United States, one must first decipher the type of visa the traveler will be using. In the case of Non-Immigrant visas (F1 student visa, J1 exchange visa, or B1 Business Visa) the applicant must be able to prove that they or their sponsor will be able to pay the expenses related to the trip. In the case of F1 and J1 visas, the applicant must show that they will also fully pay for their educational endeavors or their exchange program. In some cases, the J1 visitor must reimburse the public education system where they stay in order to obtain the J1 visa.
In the case of United States Immigrant IR1 and CR1 visas for family members from Thailand, the American Citizen must show that they meet the income or financial requirements in order to act as sponsor for their loved one. The basic concern of the Consular officer revolves around the notion that the Immigrant could become a “public charge,” if the American Citizen does not have the resources to pay for the foreign spouse. An I-864 affidavit of support is used to assist in determining if the American is capable of sponsorship.
The K1 visa is a combination of the non-immigrant and immigrant visas. That being said, an affidavit of support must be filled out by the American Citizen. The difference between the I-134 and I-864 is the fact that the I-864 is more legally binding with regard to the sponsor. If the foreign entrant ever becomes a ward of the state, then the sponsor could be forced to reimburse the American government for the expenses the foreign national incurs. The K3 visa, although a marriage visa, is technically a non-immigrant visa so the American Citizen must simply submit an I-134 affidavit of support.
In Thailand, there are certain Thai visa categories which require that the applicant show that they have some sort of financial safety net. Visas such as the Thai retirement visa and the Thailand O visa (based upon marriage), require the visa holder to continually prove that they either meet a prescribed minimum monthly income or have a certain amount of money in a Thai bank account.
For those applying for Thai visas outside of Thailand, certain consulates have differing financial requirements depending upon the visa category. Therefore, one wishing to obtain a Thai Business Visa may be required to show a minimum bank balance. The minimum financial requirement may vary from post to post.
The United States Embassy in Thailand, diligently scrutinizes the financial resources of those applicants wishing to obtain an American visa. Many people believe that there is some sort of magic numerical amount of money that if shown in a bank account will guarantee visa application approval. In reality, the Embassy looks at the “whole picture” when making decisions on US tourist visas and often simply having a large bank balance is not enough to obtain a tourist visa. Further, in cases where an American boyfriend tranfers a large amount of money into a Thai applicant’s bank account in an effort to “beef up” the applicant’s credentials, the Embassy can tell that the bank balance is artificially inflated and will likely deny the application. It is never wise to manufacture evidence in order to obtain a United States visa on behalf of another.
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.