Summary
This Second Circuit opinion addresses whether a denial of an application for adjustment of status by USCIS constitutes a unreviewable "judgment" under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i). The court held that the statutory jurisdictional bar applies to USCIS denials outside of removal proceedings, following Supreme Court precedent in Patel v. Garland. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the plaintiff's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a USCIS denial of an adjustment‑of‑status application under 8 U.S.C. §1255 is a “judgment” within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. §1252(a)(2)(B)(i) that precludes judicial review.
Holdings
- A denial of an application for adjustment of status under §1255 is a “judgment” for purposes of §1252(a)(2)(B)(i) regardless of whether it is issued by an immigration court or USCIS.
Key quotations
“We agree with the district court that §1252(a)(2)(B)(i) precludes judicial review of Xia’s claims.” (at 85)
“A denial of an application for adjustment of status under §1255 is a “judgment” for purposes of §1252(a)(2)(B)(i) regardless of whether it is issued by an immigration court or USCIS.” (at 85)
Factual background
Suqin Xia entered the United States without authorization in 1993, was placed in removal proceedings, remained unlawfully for over three decades, and filed an adjustment‑of‑status application in 2021 as the immediate relative of a U.S. citizen. USCIS denied the application on discretionary grounds in March 2024.
Procedural history
The district court dismissed Xia's mandamus and APA claims for lack of subject‑matter jurisdiction, holding that 8 U.S.C. §1252(a)(2)(B)(i) bars judicial review of a USCIS denial of an adjustment‑of‑status application because such a denial constitutes a “judgment.”