Gonzales v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Good Law
5 F. App'x 753
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 14, 2001No. 98-71421; INS NO. A27-207-033California512 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) properly concluded that Oscar Angeles Gonzales (“Petitioner”) was subject to exclusion, rather than deportation, proceedings. Parole is a legal fiction which permits an alien to be physically present in the United States for a specific purpose; the alien, however, is not deemed to have “entered” the United States. Barney v. Rogers, 83 F.3d 318 , 320 n. 1 (9th Cir.1996). Although Petitioner possessed an unexpired parole document at the time the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) instituted exclusion proceedings against him, this was not a valid entry document within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1182 . It is well established that an alien seeking an adjustment of status who leaves the country and returns pursuant to an advance parole is subject to exclusion proceedings if the adjustment application is ultimately denied. Barney, 83 F.3d at 321 . Moreover, Petitioner does not contend that his parole document was not properly terminated; he argues only that it should have been terminated prior to the institution of exclusion proceedings. The regulations, however, clearly contemplate that an exclusion order could be…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.