ROSENBLATT

10 I. & N. Dec. 154
CourtBoard of Immigration Appeals
DecidedJuly 1, 1963
Docket1260
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 10 I. & N. Dec. 154 (ROSENBLATT) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Board of Immigration Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
ROSENBLATT, 10 I. & N. Dec. 154 (bia 1963).

Opinion

Interim Decision #1260

MATTER OF ROSENBLATT

In DEPORTATION Proceedings

A-10588440 Decided by Board January 18, 190 Neither the Board of Immigration Appeals nor the special inquiry officer, in deportation proceedings, has jurisdiction to grant or to review the denial of a waiver of the foreign-residence requirements of section 212(e) of the Immi- gration and Nationality Act, as amended. (Reaffirmed, Matter of Iris, Dec. No. 1304.) °BARGE: Order : Act of 1952—Section 241 (a) (2) [8 U.S.C. 1251(a) (2)3—Nonimmigrant remained longer.

The case COMBS forward on appeal from the order of the special in- quiry officer dated October 8, 1962, denying the respondent's applica- tion for adjustment of status pursuant to section 245 of the Immigra- tion and Nationality Act, denying the application of the respondent for suspension of deportation pursuant to section 244 (a) (5) of the Act but granting the respondent's application for the privilege of voluntary departure in lieu of deportation, with the further order that if respondent failed to depart as required, the privilege of volun- tary departure would be withdrawn and the respondent would be de- ported from the United States to the Republic of the Philippines on the charge contained in theorder to show cause. The record relates to a native and citizen of the Philippine Islands 83 years old, female, who last entered the United States through the port of Honolulu, Hawaii, on January 10, 1955, at which time she was admitted as an exchange visitor to receive training as a medical doctor. Her last extension of temporary stay in the United States expired December 4, 1961, but she, has failed. to depart from the United States. Deportability on the charge contained in the Order to Show Cause is established. The respondent has made application for adjustment of status to that of a permanent resident pursuant to the provisions of section 245

154 Interim Decision. #1260 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The respondent was orig- inally admitted as an exchange visitor to receive training as a medical doctor. She therefore comes under the provisions of 9 CFR 245.1 which provides in pertinent part : Pursuant to section 212(e) of the Act, an alien who has or has had the status of an exchange alien or of a nonimmigrant under section 101(a) (15) (.1) of the Act is not eligible for the benefits of section 245 of the Act unless he has com- plied with the foreign residence requirements of section 212(e) of the Act or has been granted a waiver thereof. Section 212 (e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as added by the Act of September 21, 1961 (P.L. 87-256), the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, provides as follows : No person admitted under section 101(a) (15) (.7) or acquiring such status after admission shall be eligible to apply for an immigrant visa, or for per- manent residence, or for a nonimmigrant visa under section 101(a) (15) (PO until it is established that such person has resided and been physically present in the country of Ills nationality or his last residence, or in another foreign country for an aggregate of at least two years following departure from the United States : Provided, That such residence in another foreign country shall be con- sidered to have satisfied the requirements of this subsection if the Secretary of State determines that it has served the purpose and the intent of the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961: Provided further, That upon the favorable recommendation of the Secretary of State, pursuant to the request of an interested United States Government agency, or of the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization after he has determined that departure from the United States would impose exceptional hardship upon the alien's spouse or child (if such spouse or child is a citizen of the United States or a lawfully resident alien), the Attorney General may waive the requirement of such two- year foreign residence abroad In the case of any alien -whose admission to the United States is found by the Attorney General to be in the public interest: And provided further, That the provisions of this paragraph shall apply also to those persons who acquired exchange visitor status under the United States Informa- tion and Educational Exchange Act of 1048, as amended. The respondent submitted an application for a waiver to the Im- migration and Naturalization Service and on June 11, 1962, was informed by the District Director, Los Angeles District, that the application for a waiver had been denied (Ex. 5). The special inquiry officer has concluded that the granting of the waiver wider section 212(e) lies within the jurisdiction and the discretion of the District Director and that the authority to grant such a waiver has not been delegated to a special inquiry officer; therefore, he has no authority either to act in connection with such an application for a waiver or to review any decision made by the District Director upon an application for a waiver. Counsel contends that the provisions of section 235 (a) of the Im- migration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1225 (a) ) and of the regula- tions 8 CFR 242.17(a) are broad enough to allow the special inquiry

155 Interim Decision #1260 officer to examine every aspect of the respondent's eligibility for ad- justment of status. He summarizes his argument by stating that the Board has been granted jurisdiction to review the decision of the special inquiry officer as to eligibility for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act and, unless there is a specific statute or regula- tion to the contrary, the question of eligibility must also include a determination of the applicant's eligibility for a waiver of the two-year residence requirements. The nonimmigrant status of the respondent is defined in section 101 (a) (15) (J) of the Immigration and Nationality Act as added by section 109 (b) of the Act of September 21, 1961 (The Mutual Educa- tional and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961) as an alien having a resi- dence in a foreign country which he has no intention of abandoning who is a bona fide student, scholar, trainee, teacher, professor, research assistant, specialist, or leader in a field of specialized knowledge or skill, or other person of similar description, who is coming temporarily to the United States as a participant in a program designated by the Secretary of State, for the purpose of teaching, instructing or lectur- ing, studying, observing, conducting research, consulting, demonstrat- ing special skills, or receiving training, * * *. The legislative history dealing with this amendment discloses that a special new nonimmigrant -visa was designed to serve solely the pur- poses of the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 (H.R. 8666). By administrative arrangement a type (J) visa had been issued pursuant to authority in section 201 of the Educational Exchange Act. The main purpose of this new language is to reserve the (F) visa for students other than exchange students and made the new (J) type nonimmigrant available solely to nonimmigrants selected under the exchange program. The placing of exchange aliens in a separate category (J) would also simplify the administration of the two-year foreign residence requirement contained in the new subsection (b), which reenacts and amplifies P.L. 84 555 but contains one im- -

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

BATERINA
16 I. & N. Dec. 127 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 1977)
MOMBO
15 I. & N. Dec. 1 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 I. & N. Dec. 154, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosenblatt-bia-1963.