These summaries are not intended as legal advice. Please contact a licensed attorney to discuss the specifics of your case.
Viewing entries tagged
Administrative Procedures Act
The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has determined that there is no jurisdiction to review the denial of an adjustment of status application under the Administrative Procedure Act.
The full text of Abuzeid v. Mayorkas can be found here:
The Fourth Circuit reversed the dismissal of unlawful delay claims brought by U visa applicants who filed their applications for status in 2015 and 2016, and remanded the claims for further proceedings before the District Court. The court, however, found no authority to compel the agency to issue pre-wait list employment authorization to the applicants.
The full text of Gonzalez, et. al v. Cuccinelli can be found here:
A district court in Minnesota has rejected the AAO’s decision in Matter of H-G-G-, which held that a grant of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is not an admission for adjustment of status purposes. The court further held that for the purpose of the continuous maintenance of status requirements in section 245(c) of the INA, the grant of TPS constitutes a new entry, and maintenance of status should be measured starting on the date of the grant of TPS.
The case is called Hernandez de Gutierrez & Gutierrez v. Barr and can be found on PACER by looking up Case # 0:19-cv-02495-JRT-KMM in the District of Minnesota.
The Eleventh Circuit has determined that the “zipper clause” does not prevent a District Court from reviewing the denial of a L-1A visa petition even after removal proceedings are commenced against the applicant. The court noted that an L-1A visa petition cannot be reviewed in removal proceedings, nor is it a decision to commence removal proceedings or execute a removal order.
The full text of Canal A Media Holding, LLC v. USCIS can be found here:
http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201911193.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has held that the consular nonreviewability doctrine does not impact a federal court's subject matter jurisdiction to hear a challenge to a visa denial. The court concluded, however, that the APA provides no avenue for review of a consular officer’s adjudication of a visa on the merits. The consular officer need only provide a facially legitimate and bona fide reasons for rejecting a visa application.
The full text of Allen v. Milas can be found here:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/07/24/16-15728.pdf
The Seventh Circuit has reviewed an Administrative Procedures Act challenge to a denial of asylum by the Asylum Office. In this case, the petitioner was in valid TPS status at the time of the adjudication of his asylum application, and as such, he was not placed in removal proceedings by the Department of Homeland Security, and could not renew his asylum application before an Immigration Judge. The Seventh Circuit held that the District Court was not barred by any jurisdiction-stripping statute from taking jurisdiction over the challenge. Nevertheless, because the petitioner could ultimately seek review of his asylum application through an Immigration Court proceeding (should the Department of Homeland Security place him in removal proceedings), the decision of the asylum office is not a final agency action.
The full text of Dhakai v. Sessions can be found here:
