Integrity Legal

Those conducting research with regard to United States Family Immigration often look at either the K-1 visa or a CR-1 visa for a recent or prospective spouse. That stated, an acute concern for many American Citizens is the speedy admission of the foreign fiance or spouse to the United States of America. Under many circumstances in places such as the Kingdom of Thailand or the Kingdom of Cambodia, virtually the only means to lawfully bring a Thai or Khmer fiance or spouse to the USA involves a US Marriage Visa (such as the CR-1 visa or the IR-1 visa) or a US fiance visa (officially categorized as a K-1 visa). The question then becomes: which visa can be obtained in a more timely manner?

Currently, it usually takes less time to obtain a K-1 visa compared to a CR-1 visa. That stated, it is this blogger’s opinion that the once large gap separating the processing times of these respective visa categories has closed somewhat, from a practical perspective; and, as a result, it may be best for those researching these issues to ponder the notion of applying for a CR-1 visa or an IR-1 visa from the outset rather than undergoing the K1 visa process. Bearing this in mind, the reader should note that the process is unique to every couple as circumstances tend to dictate the timing of various stages of the process.

Although the K-1 visa does usually result in a foreign fiancee arriving in the United States more quickly than a foreign spouse under the CR-1 visa category, readers should be aware of the fact that CR-1 visa holders are admitted into the United States in Lawful Permanent Resident status. Conversely, those admitted into the United States of America in K-1 visa status must undergo the adjustment of status process in order to obtain their Green Card.

Regardless of the fact that the current USCIS Processing Times note little change in the time it takes to receive adjudication of a K-1 visa petition compared to years past, the plain truth of the matter is that the overall K-1 visa process has lengthened for many in recent months. This increased wait time may be attributable to the fact that the National Visa Center and each and every US Embassy or US Consulate has its own backlog of cases to either process or adjudicate. As the ebb and flow of American immigration continues the consular processing times are likely to increase and/or decrease depending upon the circumstances at the various US Posts abroad. At present, it is difficult to calculate with any specificity what the time frame is for Consular Processing in Asia as many factors must be taken into consideration. It is this blogger’s current opinion that under the totality of the circumstances it may be prudent for prospective family visa petitioners to conduct thorough research into the immigration process before making an irrevocable immigration decision as a visa category that looks more efficient at first glance may, in fact, turn out to be an inefficient travel document if one takes into consideration all of the factors which must be addressed in order to ultimately receive lawful permanent resident status in the U.S.A.

For related information please see: Legal.

Tags: Adjustment of Status, American Embassy Cambodia, American Embassy Thailand, American Fiance Visa, American Fiancee Visa, American Marriage Visa, American Visa Cambodia, American Visa Thailand, Consular Processing, CR-1 Visa, Green Card, IR-1 Visa, K-1 Visa, K-1 Visa Cambodia, K-1 Visa Process, K-1 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa Cambodia, K1 Visa Thailand, National Visa Center, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy Cambodia, US Embassy Phnom Penh, us embassy thailand, US Fiance Visa, US Fiancee Visa, US Marriage Visa, US Visa Cambodia, US Visa Thailand, USCIS Processing Time
Posted in CR1 Visa, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K2 Visa, K2 Visa Thailand, US Visa and Immigration | No Comments »

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) has recently updated some of the information with regard to that agency’s official fact sheet pertaining to I-864 affidavits of support. To quote directly from the official website of USCIS:

In determining inadmissibility, USCIS defines “public charge”as an individual who is likely to become “primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance, or institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.” See “Field Guidance on Deportability and Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds,” 64 FR 28689 (May 26, 1999). In determining whether an alien meets this definition for public charge inadmissibility, a number of factors are considered, including age, health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education, and skills. No single factor, other than the lack of an affidavit of support, if required, will determine whether an individual is a public charge.

Those reading this blog are encouraged to click on the hyperlinks above to read more and gain insight into the issues associated with the I-864 affidavit of support.

It should be noted that the issues associated with the I-864 affidavit of support are significant and should not be overlooked by those seeking immigration benefits. Furthermore, the issues associated with the I-864 affidavit of support pertain not only to USCIS in the United States, but also impact the Consular processing phase of U.S. Immigration process for those who are seeking United States immigrant visas, such as the IR-1 visa and the CR-1 visa, abroad. Meanwhile, seekers of visas such as the K-1 visa (for fiancees of US Citizens) must submit a similar document to a US Embassy or US Consulate abroad in the form of an I-134 affidavit of support. Bearing this in mind, the reader should take note of the fact that the issues surrounding the I-864 affidavit of support are likely to come to the forefront for K-1 visa holders when they eventually apply for adjustment of status to lawful permanent residence.

There was an interesting notation on the aforementioned website:

Note: In general, lawful permanent residents who currently possess a “green card” cannot be denied U.S. citizenship for lawfully receiving any public benefits for which they are eligible.

The reader is encouraged to bear in mind the fact that the above quotation is speaking in generalities, but the issue of naturalization in the context of the affidavit of support may be of interest to Americans thinking about bringing a loved one to the USA. The reason that Americans may find the issue of naturalization interesting when discussing family immigration stems from the fact that upon a foreign spouse’s naturalization to US Citizenship, the encumbrances placed upon the American Citizen within the provisions of the affidavit of support are extinguished as upon becoming a United States Citizen a previous foreign national becomes eligible in their own right for government benefits (where applicable). Therefore, the previous sponsor(s) are no long liable to the United States government should the newly-naturalized citizen take government benefits.

For related information please see: Certificate of Citizenship or Child Citizenship Act.

Tags: Adjustment of Status, American Citizenship, American Fiance Visa, American Marriage Visa, Certificate of Citizenship, Child Citizenship Act, CR-1 Visa, I-134, I-134 affidavit of support, I-864, I-864 affidavit of support, Inadmissibility, IR-1 Visa, K-1 Visa, Naturalization, Naturalized US Citizen, Public Charge, United States Citizenship and Immigration Service, US Citizenship, US Fiance Visa, US Marriage Visa, US Visa, USCIS
Posted in US Visa and Immigration, USCIS | No Comments »

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the discretionary powers accorded to Consular Officers at United States Missions abroad with regard to visa issuance are to be expanded to provide further latitude to Consular Officers with regard to the revocation of US visas. To quote directly from Justia.com:

This rule changes Department regulations to broaden the authority of a consular officer to revoke a visa at any time subsequent to issuance of the visa, in his or her discretion. These changes to the Department’s revocation regulations expand consular officer visa revocation authority to the full extent allowed by statute. Additionally, this rule change allows consular officers and designated officials within the Department to revoke a visa provisionally while considering a final visa revocation.

Clearly, this rule would expand the authority currently granted to Consular Officers in adjudicating American visa matters. For those who are unfamiliar with this topic it should be noted that Consular Officers currently maintain virtually un-reviewable discretion in matters pertaining to US visa application adjudication. This discretion occurs pursuant to a doctrine referred to as Consular Non-Reviewability (or colloquially referred to as Consular Absolutism). Pursuant to the philosophy underlying this doctrine Courts in the United States are unlikely to review the decisions of a Consular Officer at a US Embassy or US Consulate abroad unless the Consular Officer’s decision in the matter appears “facially illegitimate” to the Court of competent jurisdiction.

Bearing this in mind the announcement went on to point out the reasoning behind the recent decision to make this rule change:

On occasion, after a visa has been issued, the Department or a consular officer may determine that a visa should be revoked when information reveals that the applicant was originally or has since become ineligible or may be ineligible to possess a U.S. visa. Section 221(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1201(i)) (INA) authorizes the Secretary and consular officers to revoke a visa in their discretion. Current regulations limit the circumstances in which consular officers may revoke visas. In light of security concerns, this amendment grants additional authority to consular officers to revoke visas, consistent with the statutory provisions of the INA. Although this rule eliminates the provisions that permit reconsideration of a revocation, it also allows for the provisional revocation of a visa when there is a need for further consideration of information that might lead to a final revocation. In cases where the person subject to a provisional revocation is found to be eligible for the visa, the visa will be reinstated with no need for reapplication. However, with the exception of provisional revocations, an applicant whose visa has been revoked must apply for another visa, at which time his or her eligibility for the visa will be adjudicated.

In this blogger’s opinion, this rule change could have significant ramifications for prospective visa applicants. That stated, it remains to be seen what the practical implications of this rule change will be. The administration of this web log strongly encourages readers to click on the above hyperlinks to learn more about this topic on Justia.com.

It should be noted that within the text of this memo it was pointed out that this rule is being promulgated pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act. To quote one final time from the aforementioned document:

This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553 (a) (1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.

Those who have read this blog in the past may recall that the United States Department of State maintains a mandate to conduct the foreign affairs of the United States and one of the duties that is entailed within this mandate is the duty to adjudicate applications for a US visa. This can include applications for visas such as the B-2 visa (for those wishing to engage in recreational travel in the United States), the K-1 visa (a US fiance visa for the foreign fiance of a US Citizen), the CR-1 visa or IR-1 visa (for the spouse of an American Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident), or, in increasingly rare instances, a K-3 visa (which is a non-immigrant spouse visa for the husband or wife of an American Citizen). It is even posited that this new discretion could have an effect upon adjudication of L-1 visa and EB-5 visa applications, as well as the possible aftermath thereof. In any case, increased Consular discretion is likely to have an impact upon visa applications across the categorical spectrum of American travel documents.

For related information please see: K-1 Visa Thailand or K-1 Visa Cambodia.

For information related to waivers of grounds of inadmissibility (ineligibility) please see: I-601 waiver or I-212 waiver.

Tags: American Institute, American State Department, Consul, Consular Absolutism, Consular Non-Reviewability, Consular Officer, Consular Processing, CR-1 Visa, Department of State, Facially Illegitimate, Facially Legitmate, final visa revocation, I-212 waiver, I-601 Waiver, Immigrant Visa Unit, IR-1 Visa, IV Unit, K-1 Visa, K-1 Visa Cambodia, K-1 Visa Thailand, K-3 Visa, NIV Unit, Non-Immigrant Visa Unit, provisional visa revocation, US Consulate, US Embassy, US Fiance Visa, US Mission, US Visa Cambodia, us visa denial, US Visa Denied, US Visa Thailand, Vice Consul, visa denial, visa denied, visa eligibility, visa revocation
Posted in I-601 Waiver, US Consulate ChengDu, US Consulate Chennai, US Consulate Chiang Mai, US Consulate Guangzhou, US Consulate HCMC, US Consulate Hong Kong, US Consulate Hyderabad, US Consulate Kolkata, US Consulate Macau, US Consulate Mumbai, US Consulate Shanghai, US Consulate Shenyang, US Consulate Singapore, US Consulate Vladivostok, US Consulate Wuhan, US Embassy Australia, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy Bangladesh, US Embassy Beijing, US Embassy Brunei Darussalam, US Embassy Burma, US Embassy Cambodia, US Embassy China, US Embassy Dhaka, US Embassy Fiji, US Embassy Hanoi, US Embassy India, US Embassy Indonesia, US Embassy Iraq, US Embassy Islamabad, US Embassy Jakarta, US Embassy Japan, US Embassy Kathmandu, US Embassy Kiribati, US Embassy Kuala Lumpur, US Embassy Kyrgyz Republic (Kyrgyzstan), US Embassy Laos, US Embassy Malaysia, US Embassy Maldives, US Embassy Manila, US Embassy Mauritius, US Embassy Mongolia, US Embassy Myanmar, US Embassy Nauru, US Embassy Nepal, US Embassy New Dehli, US Embassy New Zealand, US Embassy Pakistan, US Embassy Papua New Guinea, US Embassy Philippines, US Embassy Phnom Phen, US Embassy Port Moresby, US Embassy Rangoon, US Embassy Russia, US Embassy Singapore, US Embassy South Korea, US Embassy Sri Lanka, US Embassy Suva, US Embassy Thailand, US Embassy Tokyo, US Embassy Tonga, US Embassy Turkmenistan, US Embassy Tuvalu, US Embassy Uzbekistan, US Embassy Vietnam, US Embassy Yangon, US State Department, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand | No Comments »

While surfing the internet recently this blogger came upon a very interesting posting on the ILW website which discussed the issue of naturalization in the United States and how the naturalization process operates when a prospective United States Citizen who may seek naturalization remains outside of the United States while working for an American company with offices abroad.  To quote directly from an article written by Attorney Cyrus D. Mehta on the website ILW.com:

It is not uncommon for a permanent resident to receive a plum posting for an American corporation overseas or for its subsidiary. This is a frequent occurrence these days in a globalized world, and especially when jobs have become more scarce in the US since the economic downturn. While such an assignment may provide a great boost to the permanent resident’s career, he or she may still wish to preserve the ability to naturalize, but the overseas posting presents a challenge since it may be difficult to maintain continuous residence. One of the key requirements for applying for US citizenship under INA § 316(a) is the need to be physically present for half the time in the US during the qualifying period, which may either be five or three years (if one is married to a US citizen) and to have also resided continuously during this period. The challenges of maintaining residence while on an overseas assignment were addressed in a prior blog, Naturalizing In A Flat World, http://cyrusmehta.blogspot.com/2010/07/naturalizing-in-flat-world.html.

Those reading this blog are well advised to click on the hyperlinks above to read the above cited article in its entirety as the article is very insightful.

Those who are unfamiliar with the overall immigration process should note that visas such as the CR-1 visa and the IR-1 visa (utilized by the immigrant spouses of American Citizens) can place the visa holder on something of a “path to Citizenship”. That being stated, the CR-1 visa only provides the visa holder with conditional lawful permanent residence upon entry as such visas are issued to couples who have been married for less than 2 years at the time of admission to the USA. Meanwhile, the IR-1 visa provides unconditional lawful permanent residence upon admission to the USA and is issued to spouses of American Citizens who have been married for 2 years or more. After remaining in permanent resident status in the USA for 3 years, and maintaining the requisite physical presence required under relevant US law, a permanent resident, married to an American, can file for naturalization to United States Citizenship.

This issue also relates to the K-1 visa (a non-immigrant US fiance visa) because those who enter the United States in K-1 status, get married, and apply for adjustment of status may begin accruing time toward eventual naturalization as soon as the adjustment of status petition is approved. Once an adjustment is approved for a K-1 visa holder, then that individual essentially becomes a CR-1 visa holder with Lawful Permanent Residence. Therefore, the K-1 holder, now permanent resident, must still apply for a lift of conditions before being granted unconditional lawful permanent residence which must precede an eventual naturalization application.

As noted in the article cited above, there may be some US permanent residents who can accrue time toward naturalization while not actually physically in the United States if such an endeavor fits within some of the exceptions present within the statutory framework of relevant US Immigration law. American companies with offices abroad may fit the statutory exception scheme for naturalization notwithstanding foreign residence. However, the unique facts in any case require that those truly interested in this issue must either conduct their own thorough research or retain the assistance of an American attorney as this issue can be highly complex.

Many American companies operating out of the Kingdom of Thailand opt to conduct their affairs pursuant to the privileges accorded to Americans and American companies under the US-Thai Treaty of Amity. So-called “Treaty of Amity Companies” may allow for an American individual or company to own virtually 100% of a Thai enterprise conducting business in Thailand. Amity certification allows American businesses to operate with “National Treatment” and thereby circumvent some of the restrictions placed upon foreign business enterprises pursuant to other relevant Thai law. That said, Amity Treaty certification may not, in and of itself, mean that one working for such a company can accrue time toward naturalization while abroad as such issues are likely best analyzed on a case-by-case basis.

For related information please see: Thai Company or US Company Registration.

Tags: American Amity Treaty, American Amity Treaty Thailand, Amity Treaty Company, CR-1 Visa, Cyrus D. Mehta, ILW.com, INA § 316(a), IR-1 Visa, K-1 Visa, Naturalization, US Fiance Visa, US-Thai Treaty of Amity
Posted in Amity Treaty | No Comments »

สิ่งที่เกิดขึ้นและเป็นที่น่าสนใจเมื่อเร็วๆนี้  หน่วยบริการคนเข้าเมืองและพลเมืองสัญชาติอเมริกัน (USCIS) อาจจะมีการเปลี่ยนแปลงในขั้นตอนต่างๆซึงเกี่ยวกับกระบวนการการยื่นคำขอเข้าเมืองที่เกี่ยวกับการขอวีซ่าประเภทซีอาร์-1 ไออาร์-1 วีซ่า เค-1 และวีซ่าเค-3 ซึ่งยื่นโดยพลเมืองอเมริกันและพลเมืองที่มีถิ่นฐานถาวร อ้างโดยตรงจากบันทึกของ USCIS ที่อ้างลงใน ILW.com:

บันทึกนี้ได้ให้คำแนะนำในเรื่องของศูนย์บริการ USCIS ในประเด็นของการเปลี่ยนแปลงในการจัดการของคำขอ I-130 และ คำขอ I-129F ที่ยื่นโดยผู้ยื่นคำขอที่เกี่ยวข้องกับ “ข้อหาเกี่ยวกับความผิดเล็กๆน้อยๆ” ภายใต้พระราชบัญญัติการความปลอดภัยและการปกป้องเด็กอดัม วอร์ช ปี 2006 (พระราชบัญญัติอดัม วอร์ช หรือ AWA) และเกี่ยวข้องกันกับประเด็นนี้ บันทึกนี้ปรับใช้กับคำขอที่เกี่ยวกับศูนย์บริการและไม่ใช่คำขอที่เกี่ยวข้องกับสำนักงานของ USCIS

โดยทั่วไปแล้ว คำขอ I-130 (ประเภทที่ใช้สำหรับการอ้างคำขอของวีซ่า CR-1 หรือวีซ่า IR-1)เป็นกระบวนการของ หน่วยบริการ USCIS ซึ่งเป็นกระบวนการเฉพาะและเป็นหลักฐานการชำระเงิน ในบางกรณี อาจจะเป็นไปได้ที่กระบวนการของ I-130ในสำนักงานต่างๆที่ตั้งอยู่ในต่างแดน เช่นสำนักงาน USCISในกรุงเทพฯ คำขอของ I-129f (เป็นประเภทหนึ่งของการยื่นคำขอวีซ่าคู่หมั้นสหรัฐ หรือวีซ่า K1)ซึ่งอยู่ในขั้นตอนการดำเนินงานของศูนย์บริการUSCISในสหรัฐอเมริกา เนื่องจากสำนักงานหลักไม่สามารถดำเนินการต่างๆได้ในขณะที่เขียนบทความนี้อยู่ อ้างเพิ่มเติมจากบันทึกข้อความที่กล่าวถึงก่อนหน้านี้

USCIS จะเป็นศูนย์กลางที่ VSC ในการเป็นศูนย์บริการ หากศูนย์บริการได้มีการตัดสินใจในเบื้องต้นว่ามีการประกันคำขอในฐานะที่เป็นเรื่องเกี่ยวกับ AWA ที่ VSCจะให้บริการการจัดการกับปัญหาต่างๆจากรัฐบาลกลาง รัฐ และตัวแทนท้องถิ่นอื่นๆในเรื่องที่เกี่ยวกับ AWA ดำเนินการอยู่ หรือเรื่องที่เกี่ยวกับหนึ่งในสี่ของศูนย์บริการ (ในที่นี้อ้างถึง “หน่วยบริการต้นกำเนิด” หรือ “หน่วยบริการที่ส่งไป”) ในนขณะที่เรื่องที่เกี่ยวกับAWA ต้องการที่จะจัดการแบบพิเศษ การตัดสินใจที่จะรวมอำนาจเกี่ยวกับ AWAที่ VSC จะกระทบต่อเรื่องที่อยู่ในศูนย์บริการอื่นเพียงเล็กน้อย

เป็นที่เห็นได้ชัดเจนว่า หน่วยบริการการเข้าเมืองและพลเมืองอเมริกัน (USCIS) ได้มีการเปลี่ยนแปลงนโยบายเพื่อที่จะเพิ่มประสิทธิภาพในการตรวจสอบตามพระราชบัญญัติอดัม วอร์ช (AWA) ในบทบาทของศูนย์บริการในเวอร์มอนท์ซึ่งเกี่ยวข้อง

กับ AWAในบทบาทของศูนย์บริการวีซ่าแห่งชาติในกระบวนการทั่วทั้งสหรัฐเนื่องจากตัวแทนมีภาระหน้าที่ในเรื่องเกี่ยวกับคำขอวีซ่าซึ่งมาจาก USCIS และผ่านกระบวนการของสถานทูตอเมริกา หรือกงสุลสหรัฐในต่างประเทศ แม้NVCอยู่ภายใต้อำนาจของกระทรวงของรัฐในขณะที่ศูนย์บริการเUSCISวอร์มอนท์(เหมือนกับศูนย์บริการ USCIS อื่นๆ) ภายใต้เขตขอำนาจของกระทรวงความมั่นคงแห่งมาตุภูมิ (DHS)และ USCIS

To view this posting in English please see: K-1 visa.

Tags: Adam Walsh Act, AWA, CR-1 Visa, Department of Homeland Security, DHS, I-129f, I-130, IR-1 Visa, K-1 Visa, K1 Visa, United States Citizenship and Immigration Service, US Visa Burma, US Visa Cambodia, US Visa Laos, US Visa Malaysia, US Visa Myanmar, US Visa Thailand, USCIS, กระทรวงความมั่นคงเเห่ง, พระราชบัญญัติอดัม วอร์ช, วีซ่า ซี อาร์วัีน, วีซ่า เคทรี, วีซ่า ไอ อาร์ วัน, วีซ่าคู่หมั้นสหรัฐ, วีซ่าสหรัฐในไทย, วีซ่าอเมริกาในไทย, วีซ่าเค วัน, ศูนย์บริการวีซ่าเเห่งชาติ, หน่วยบริการวีซ่า
Posted in สถานทูตสหรัฐอเมริกาประจำประเทศไทย | No Comments »

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) may be changing some of the procedures associated with the processing of immigration petitions pertaining to the application for issuance of the CR-1 visa, IR-1 visa, K-1 visa, and K-3 visa filed by United States Citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents. To quote directly from a recent USCIS Memo posted on ILW.com:

This memorandum provides guidance to USCIS service centers regarding changes in the handling of all stand-alone I-130 and I-129F petitions filed by petitioners who have been convicted of any “specified offense against a minor” under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (“Adam Walsh Act” or “AWA”) and related issues.1 This memorandum applies only to petitions that are adjudicated at the service centers and not to petitions adjudicated at USCIS field offices.

Generally I-130 petitions (the categorical designation used to refer to the petition for a CR-1 visa or an IR-1 visa) are processed by the USCIS Service Center designated by the lockbox upon receipt. In some cases, it may be possible to process an I-130 petition at one of the various USCIS field offices located abroad, such as the USCIS office in Bangkok. The I-129f petition (categorical designation used to denote the US fiance visa or K1 visa) can only be processed at a USCIS Service Center in the USA as the field offices overseas do not process such petitions as of the time of this writing. To quote further from the previously mentioned memorandum:

USCIS will centralize at VSC all files currently at service centers if the service center adjudicator has made a preliminary determination that the petition warrants review as an AWA-related case. The VSC will serve as a central clearinghouse for inquiries from Federal, State, and local agencies regarding AWA-related cases that are pending or were recently adjudicated at one of the four service centers [hereafter referred to as “originating service center” or “sending service center”]. While AWA-related cases require special handling, the decision to centralize AWA-related adjudications at the VSC will affect caseloads at other service centers only minimally.

Clearly, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) is making policy changes in an effort to take steps to more efficiently process cases requiring further scrutiny pursuant to the Adam Walsh Act (AWA). In a way, the Vermont Service Center’s role in AWA-related cases is somewhat similar to the role of the National Visa Center in the overall US visa process as that agency is tasked with acting as a sort of clearinghouse for visa applications arriving from USCIS and being processed out to a US Embassy or US Consulate abroad. Although, NVC is under the authority of the Department of State whereas the Vermont Service Center (like the other USCIS Service Centers) is under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and USCIS.

For related information please see: Adam Walsh Act.

Tags: Adam Walsh Act, American Immigration Attorney, American Immigration lawyer, American Visa Attorney, American Visa Lawyer, AWA, CR-1 Visa, CR-1 Visa Thailand, IR-1 Visa, K-1 Visa, K-1 Visa Burma, K-1 Visa Cambodia, K-1 Visa China, K-1 Visa Hong Kong, K-1 Visa India, K-1 Visa Indonesia, K-1 Visa Laos, K-1 Visa Myanmar, K-1 Visa Philippines, K-1 Visa Singapore, K-1 Visa Taiwan, K-1 Visa Thailand, K-1 Visa Vietnam, K-3 Visa, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa Cambodia, K1 Visa Laos, K1 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa Vietnam, National Visa Center, NVC, United States Citizenship and Immigration Service, US Immigration attorney, US Immigration Lawyer, US Visa Attorney, us visa lawyer, US Visa Thailand, USCIS, USCIS Processing Times
Posted in CR1 Visa, Department of Homeland Security, Fiance Visa Thailand, IR1 Visa, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K2 Visa, K2 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, National Visa Center, US State Department, US Visa, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS | No Comments »

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the Cambodian government has changed some of the regulations regarding registration of marriage in that Kingdom. To quote directly from a recent posting on the blog United Khmer:

MALE foreigners over the age of 50 have been outlawed from marrying Cambodian women in the country under new rules designed to crack down on sham marriages and human trafficking, the government said today.

Human trafficking is a serious issue in many Asian nations including those comprising the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The posting went on to further note:

Foreigners who earn less than $2,580 per month are also barred from wedding local women, foreign ministry spokesman Koy Kuong told AFP, but the restrictions do not apply to weddings taking place overseas.

It would seem as though the Cambodian government is also attempting to make rules in an attempt to ensure that those Cambodian women marrying foreign men are more likely to be materially provided for.

It is increasingly common for both men and women from the United States of America to travel to Southeast Asian nations such as Cambodia, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, Myanmar (Burma), Laos, Malaysia, and Singapore for both business matters and pleasure. In some cases, American Citizens traveling abroad meet someone special and decide to bring their loved one back to the United States. Under such circumstances, it will likely be required that the foreign loved one obtain a United States visa.

Depending upon the unique facts of each given case couples may opt to apply for a US fiance visa (officially classified as a K-1 visa) or a spousal visa such as a CR-1 visa or, less commonly, a non-immigrant K-3 visa. Those couples who have been married for more than 2 years at the time of their admission to the United States are likely to see the prospective immigrant spouse admitted into the USA in IR-1 visa status.

The immigration process is a different experience for each couple and as the process evolves it also constantly changes. For this reason (likely amongst many others)  some couples opt to retain the assistance of a professional to provide insight into the protocols associated with United States immigration. Under those circumstances, those seeking advice and counsel are well advised to ascertain the credentials of anyone claiming to be an American attorney as only a licensed attorney from the United States is permitted to practice United States Immigration law.

For related information please see: US tourist visa.

Tags: Cambodia Marriage Registration, Cambodian Marriage, Cambodian Marriage Registration, Cambodian Wedding, Cambodian Wedding Registration, CR-1 Visa, CR-1 Visa Cambodia, CR1 Visa Cambodia, Foreigners Marrying Cambodians, Human Trafficking, human trafficking Cambodia, IR-1 Visa, IR-1 Visa Cambodia, IR1 Visa Cambodia, K-1 Visa, K-1 Visa Cambodia, K1 Visa Cambodia, Khmer Marriage Registration, Khmer Wedding Registration, US Fiance Visa, US Fiance Visa Cambodia, US Marriage Visa Cambodia
Posted in CR1 Visa, IR1 Visa, K1 Visa, K2 Visa, K3 Visa, US Embassy Cambodia, US Embassy Phnom Phen, US Visa, US Visa and Immigration | No Comments »

In recent weeks it has come to this blogger’s attention, via organizations such as the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) and through the website of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), that the USCIS has made decisions which has lead to a delay in processing a relatively significant number of I-130 petitions for Immediate relative immigration benefits. To quote directly from the official website of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS):

In November 2010, USCIS transferred approximately 36,000 Immediate Relative petitions from our California Service Center to our Texas Service Center. We anticipated that this redistribution of work would result in more timely adjudication of these petitions. Due to a number of unforeseen circumstances at our Texas Service Center, many of these cases have not been processed and are beyond our estimated processing times. We sincerely regret any inconvenience this may have caused you and we are making every effort to remedy this situation as soon as possible.

It is easy to lay blame upon people and organizations. Those reading this piece should note that mistakes occur in life. Businesses, individuals, organizations, and governments do make mistakes and playing the “blame game” often yields little in terms of practical solutions. That said, the USCIS is a government entity and should be accountable for their mistakes. Clearly, the USCIS has taken responsibility for this error and has taken measures to rectify the situation. To quote further from the official website of the USCIS:

On Feb. 7, 2011, we implemented a rapid response plan to expedite the adjudication of these petitions. We have transferred a large number of these Immediate Relative petitions back to our California Service Center to take advantage of resources currently available to immediately process these cases. Petitioners will see an action such as an approval, denial or a Request for Evidence (RFE) on their case from our California or Texas Service Centers by the end of February. Additionally, we have briefed the Department of State’s National Visa Center about these cases.

USCIS’s efforts to solve this problem should not be overlooked. For those seeking an Immigrant visa for a foreign spouse, the K-3 visa has been used in the past to obtain an expedited travel document when the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service has a backlog of cases. In recent months, the United States National Visa Centerpiece  has had an “administrative closure” policy regarding those K-3 visa applications that arrive at the NVC with, or after, their I-130 counterparts. There are some who speculate that there might be more K-3 visas issued as a result of the backlog created from the situation note above. At the time of this writing, it remains unclear as to exactly how American Immigration officials will opt to deal with this matter.

For related information please see: USCIS processing time.

Tags: American Visa, CR-1 Visa, I-129f, I-130, Immediate Relative Petition, IR-1 Visa, K-3 Visa, K-3 Visa China, K-3 Visa India, K-3 Visa Japan, K-3 Visa South Korea, K-3 Visa Taiwan, K-3 Visa Thailand, K-3 Visa Vietnam, United States Citizenship and Immigration Service, US Marriage Visa, US Visa, US Visa Cambodia, US Visa China, US Visa India, US Visa Indonesia, US Visa Japan, US Visa Malaysia, US Visa Myanmar, US Visa Singapore, US Visa South Korea, US Visa Taiwan, US Visa Thailand, US Visa Vietnam, USCIS, USCIS Delay, USCIS Error, USCIS News
Posted in USCIS | No Comments »

นอกจากนี้ ภาษากฎหมายที่นักกฎหมายฝ่ายรัฐบาลใช้ในศาลในการที่จะแบ่งแยกคำตัดสินที่เกี่ยวกับการค้นหาข้อเท็จจริงโดยอัยการเป็นไปด้วยความระมัดระวังและลบล้างคำวินิจฉัยทั้งหมดจากความเห็นทางกฎหมาย นั่นเป็นการแปลความที่ไม่สมเหตุสมผลตามพระราชบัญญัติคนเข้าเมืองและสัญชาติซึ่งมองไปข้างหน้าถึงมาตรฐานของข้อเท็จจริงการพิจารณากระบวนการเพิกถอน

จากการรวบรวมข้างต้น สถานะของรัฐบาลสหรัฐอเมริกาในการที่จะปฏิเสธคำขอ I-130 คือ ในพฤติการณ์ที่ศาลไม่สามารถที่จะทบทวนคำวินิจฉัยที่วินิจฉัยโดยผู้มีอำนาจในหน่วยบริการคนเข้าเมืองและพลเมืองของสหรัฐอเมริกา (USCIS) เป็นประเด็นที่น่าสนใจว่า ศาลไม่ถูกชักจูงโดยข้อโต้เถียงและการทบทวนคำวินิจฉัย แม้แต่คำคัดค้านของรัฐบาล

สำหรับผู้ที่ไม่คุ้นเคยกับกระบวนการทำวีซ่าสหรัฐอเมริกา คำขอ I-130 นั้นเป็นขั้นตอนแรกที่จะทำให้คนต่างด้าวมีความเกี่ยวพันนกับสหรัฐอเมริกา คำขอนั้นใช้เพื่อผู้ที่ประสงค์จะพาคู่หมั้นชาวต่างชาติไปสหรัฐอเมริกา ในกรณีที่คำขอ I-130 ได้รับการอนุมัติ เรื่องที่ได้รับการอนุมัตินั้นจะถูกส่งต่อไปยังศูนย์บริการทางวีซ่า (NVC)ซึ่งเป็นตัวแทนภายใต้กงสุลสหรัฐอเมริกาในโฮจิมินห์ซิตี้ทาง NVC ในขณะเดียวกัน คู่หมั้นชาวไทยมีแนวโน้มที่จะดำเนินการในการขอวีซ่าโดยติดต่อทางสถานทูตสหรัฐอเมริกาในกรุงเทพฯโดยทางศูนย์บริการวีซ่า คู่หมั้นชาวจีนอาจจะดำเนินการในสถางกงสุลสหรัฐอเมริกาในจีนหรือสถานทูตสหรัฐอเมริกาในปักกิ่ง เช่นเดียวกันกับอินเดีย ภารกิจของสหรัฐอเมริกาในทั้งสองประเทศมีการเปลี่ยนแปปลงที่สำคัญเพื่อที่จะอำนวยความสะดวกสำหรับผู้ที่จะทำวีซ่าหลังจากกระบวนการของ NVC

ประเด็นเกี่ยวกับความเห็นทางกฎหมายในทางกฎหมายคนเข้าเมืองเป็นเรื่องที่ซับซ้อนเรื่องหนึ่ง ดังนั้นองค์ประกอบต่างๆของกระบวนการทำวีซ่าอาจจะมีความหลากหลายในประเด็นทางกฎหมายขึ้นอยู่กับพฤติการณ์ในแต่ละเรื่อง สำหรับเหตุผลนี้คู่สองสัญชาตินั้นควรเลือกที่จะให้ทนายความช่วยจัดการในการขอยื่นคำขอวีซ่าและผู้เชี่ยวชาญที่ได้รับอนุญาตนั้นสามารถที่จะดำเนินการทุกขั้นตอนและจัดการให้เป็นไปตามกระบวนการขอวีซ่าได้อย่างครบถ้วน

To see this information in English please refer to the previous blog posting.

Tags: CR-1 Visa, CR1 Visa, I-130, I130, IR-1 Visa, IR1 Visa, K-1 Visa, K-3 Visa, K1 Visa, K3 Visa, NVC, USCIS, กฎหมายคนเข้าเมืองอเมริกา, ขอวีซ่าอเมริกันในไทย, คนเข้าเมืองอเมริกัน, คำขอ I-130, วีซ่าถาวรในไทย
Posted in สถานทูตสหรัฐอเมริกาประจำประเทศไทย, ้วีซ่าอเมริกาจากประเทศไทย | No Comments »

Those who read this blog on a regular basis will no doubt realize that when new information regarding Consular processing comes out this administration tries to post it in an effort to provide insight to those processing a visa application through the relevant Post. It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the United States Embassy in Manila, Philippines is changing their protocols for Immigrant visa processing. The following is a brief quotation from the official website of the US Embassy in Manila:

Effective December 1, 2010, various changes to immigrant visa services are as follows:

• Immigrant visa applicants whose appointments have not been scheduled through the National Visa Center (NVC) (i.e., immigrant visa petitions approved by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigrations Services Manila) may request a visa appointment by visiting the U.S. Embassy in Manila’s Visa Information and Appointment Service online at http://www.ustraveldocs.com/ph or by calling (632) 982-5555. The Visa Information and Appointment Service is open Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. (Manila time), except on U.S. and Philippine holidays. Callers in the U.S. should call (214) 571-1600, from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (Eastern Standard Time). Callers are able to speak with an English-, Tagalog-, Ilocano- or Cebuano-speaking operator.
• Visa Information and Appointment Service representatives can provide information on visa appointment-related inquiries only. Inquiries on a specific case may be directed to the Immigrant Visa (IV) Unit by e-mail at [email protected] or by fax at (632) 301-2591. Petitioners and applicants may also call the IV Inquiry line at (632) 301-2000, extension 5184 or 5185 during normal business hours.
• Immigrant visa applicants who have been scheduled by the NVC for a visa appointment at the Embassy are required to visit the online appointment website to register their delivery address.
• K visa applicants who have been notified by the Embassy to prepare for their interview, must pay the visa application fee of $350 before they can request a visa appointment via the online appointment website or the Visa Call Center
  

It should be noted that the above quotation does not encompass all of the information provided upon the official website. Those interested in obtaining further information are encouraged to correspond directly with either an American immigration attorney or the US Embassy in the Philippines.

The Consular Processing phase is usually the last phase of the US visa process for those with immigrant intent. Although in certain cases, a 221g refusal may be issued if the adjudicating Consular Officer feels that further documentation is required to process an application. Furthermore, a visa application may be denied if it is found that a legal grounds of inadmissibility exists in a given case. Under such circumstances, it may be possible to remedy the denial through use of an I-601 waiver of inadmissibility.

In American family based visa cases, the Immigrant Visa Unit of a US Consulate abroad is responsible for the adjudication of a visa application for those seeking a K1 visa, K3 visa, CR-1 visa, or an IR-1 visa.  Those seeking a non-immigrant visa such as a B1 visa (US Business Visa), B2 visa (US Tourist Visa), F1 visa (US Student Visa), or J1 visa (Cultural Exchange Visa) must interview with an adjudicator at the Non-immigrant visa unit of the Post with Consular jurisdiction to adjudicate a visa application.

For related information please see: US Embassy Philippines.

Tags: 221(g) refusal, 221g, 221g denial, American Visa Philippines, B-1 Visa, B-2 Visa, B1 visa, B2 Visa, Consular Processing, CR-1 Visa, CR1 Visa, CR1 Visa Philippines, CR1 Visa Process, F-1 Visa, F1 Visa, I-601 Waiver, I-601 waiver Philippines, Immigrant Visa Unit US Embassy Philippines, IR-1 Visa, IR1 Visa, IR1 Visa Philippines, IR1 Visa Process, J-1 visa, J1 visa, K-1 Visa, K-3 Visa, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Philippines, K1 Visa Process, K3 Visa, K3 Visa Philippines, K3 Visa Process, US Business Visa, US Consulate Manila, US consulate Philippines, US Embassy Manila, US Embassy Philippines, US Exchange Visitor Visa, US Student Visa, US Tourist Visa, US Visa Philippines, USA Visa Philippines
Posted in CR1 Visa, I-601 Waiver, IR1 Visa, J1 visa, K1 Visa, K2 Visa, K3 Visa, US Embassy Manila, US Embassy Philippines, US State Department, US Tourist Visa, US Visa, US Visa and Immigration, USCIS, Visa Waiver | No Comments »