Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

AAO Arrabally Yerabelly TPS cases

391
views

Published on

Published in: News & Politics, Lifestyle

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
391
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. AAO Issues Revised Decision in Arrabally/Yerrabelly TPS Case(Updated October 26, 2012)On September 18, 2012, the AAO dismissed the applicant’s appeal of the denial of his I-601, finding that he did not make a “departure” for purposes of INA §212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II)where he left on advance parole and returned to the U.S. to resume temporary protectedstatus.On October 26, 2012, the AAO issued a revised decision on the appeal, removing referenceto the applicant’s TPS status, but still finding that he did not make a “departure” forpurposes of §212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II).Both decisions follow. The revised decision precedes the original decision.Courtesy of Steve Thal.AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 12102242. (Posted 10/26/12)
  • 2. Date: Office: ST. PAUL, MNINRE: Applicant:U.S. Department of Homeland SecurityU.S. Citizenship and Immigration ServicesAdministrative Appeals Office (AAO)20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090Washington, DC 20529-2090u.s. Citizenshipand ImmigrationServicesFILE:APPLICATION: Application for Waiver ofGrounds ofInadmissibility under section 212(a)(9)(B) oftheImmigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(B)ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT:INSTRUCTIONS:Enclosed please fmd the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documentsrelated to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please be advised thatany further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office.Thank you,Perry RhewChief, Administrative Appeals Officewww.uscis.govAILA InfoNet Doc. No. 12102242. (Posted 10/26/12)
  • 3. Page 2DISCUSSION: The waiver application was denied by the Field Office Director, St. Paul,Minnesota. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) dismissed an appeal of the denial findingthat the applicant was not inadmissible. Upon Service motion, 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(5)(i), the AAOwithdraws its decision of September 13, 2012, and issues this revised decision to clarify theapplicants relevant immigration status.The applicant is a native and citizen of EI Salvador who entered the United States on March 15,2000 without inspection. The applicant departed the United States in 2008 based on a grant ofadvance parole. He was paroled into the United States on August 23, 2008. Upon adjudication ofthe application for adjustment of status the Field Office Director, St. Paul, Minnesota, found theapplicant to be inadmissible to the United States pursuant to section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) of theImmigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II), for having beenunlawfully present in the United States for more than one year. The applicant filed a waiver ofinadmissibility in conjunction with his application for adjustment of status in order to reside in theUnited States with his U.S. Citizen spouse.The Field Office Director concluded that the applicant had failed to establish that extreme hardshipwould be imposed on a qualifying relative and denied the Application for Waiver of Ground ofExcludability (Form 1-601) accordingly. Decision of the Field Office Director, dated January 1,2011.Section 212(a)(9)ofthe Act provides:(B) ALIENS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT.-(i) In general.- Any alien (other than an alien lawfully admitted for permanentresidence) who-(I) was unlawfully present in the United States for a period of more than 180days but less than 1 year, voluntarily departed the United States (whether ornot pursuant to section 244(e) prior to the commencement of proceedingsunder section 235(b)(1) or section 240), and again seeks admission within 3years ofthe date of such aliens departure or removal, or(II) has been unlawfully present in the United States for one year or more, andwho again seeks admission within 10 years ofthe date of such aliens departureor removal from the United States, is inadmissible.In Matter ofArrabally and Yerrabelly, 25 I&N Dec. 771 (BIA 2012), the Board of ImmigrationAppeals (BIA) held that an applicant for adjustment of status who left the United States temporarilypursuant to advance parole under section 212(d)(5)(A) ofthe Act did not make a departure from theUnited States within the meaning of section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) of the Act. Here, the applicantobtained advance parole under section 212(d)(5)(A) of the Act, temporarily left the United Statespursuant to that grant of advance parole, and was paroled into the United States. In accordance withthe BIAs decision in Matter ofArrabally, the applicant did not make a departure from the UnitedStates for the purposes of section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) of the Act. Accordingly, the applicant is notAILA InfoNet Doc. No. 12102242. (Posted 10/26/12)
  • 4. Page 3inadmissible under section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(lI) of the Act. The applicants waiver application is thusunnecessary and the appeal will be dismissed.ORDER: The appeal is dismissed as the underlying waiver application is unnecessary.AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 12102242. (Posted 10/26/12)
  • 5. Original 9/18/12 decision follows.AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 12102242. (Posted 10/26/12)
  • 6. AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 12102242. (Posted 10/22/12)
  • 7. AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 12102242. (Posted 10/22/12)
  • 8. AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 12102242. (Posted 10/22/12)