Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

statuteappealvisa
statuteappealvisa

Related Cases

Bagamasbad; Immigration and Naturalization Service v.
View Case »
Alizoti v. Gonzales
View Case »
Ruth; U.S. v.
View Case »
Soriano Nunez; U.S. v.
View Case »
Witjaksono v. Holder
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Regis v. Holder

Facts

Noel Joseph Menor Regis, a native of the Philippines, entered the United States on a K-2 visa in 2007 as the minor child of his mother, a K-1 visa holder. After his mother married a U.S. citizen, Regis applied for adjustment of status but was denied because he had turned 21 before entering the U.S. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the denial, stating that Regis did not qualify as a 'minor child' under the relevant statutes.

Noel Joseph Menor Regis, a native of the Philippines, entered the United States on a K-2 visa in 2007 as the minor child of his mother, a K-1 visa holder.

Issue

Whether a K-2 visa holder seeking adjustment of status must be under 21 at the time of admission to the United States to qualify as a 'minor child' under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Whether a K-2 visa holder seeking adjustment of status must be under 21 at the time of admission to the United States to qualify as a 'minor child' under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Rule

The Board of Immigration Appeals' interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which states that a K-2 visa holder must be under 21 at the time of admission to qualify for adjustment of status, is entitled to Chevron deference.

The Board of Immigration Appeals' interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which states that a K-2 visa holder must be under 21 at the time of admission to qualify for adjustment of status, is entitled to Chevron deference.

Analysis

The court applied the Chevron deference test to the BIA's interpretation of the INA, determining that the statute was ambiguous regarding when a K-2 visa holder must be under 21. The BIA's interpretation, which required the applicant to be under 21 at the time of entry into the U.S., was found to be a permissible construction of the statute and consistent with the statutory framework.

The court applied the Chevron deference test to the BIA's interpretation of the INA, determining that the statute was ambiguous regarding when a K-2 visa holder must be under 21.

Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit affirmed the BIA's decision, concluding that Regis was not eligible for adjustment of status because he was over 21 at the time of his admission to the United States.

The Fourth Circuit affirmed the BIA's decision, concluding that Regis was not eligible for adjustment of status because he was over 21 at the time of his admission to the United States.

Who won?

The government prevailed in the case because the court upheld the BIA's interpretation of the INA, which denied Regis' application for adjustment of status based on his age at the time of entry.

The government prevailed in the case because the court upheld the BIA's interpretation of the INA, which denied Regis' application for adjustment of status based on his age at the time of entry.

You must be