Albaro Elias Tista v. Eric H. Holder Jr., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 13730

Petitioner Albaro Elias Tista, born January 1979 (Guatemalan national), applied in Sept. 1999 for NACARA special-rule cancellation of removal as a derivative child of his father.
Elias’s father, Tomas Elias Perez, was granted lawful permanent residency under NACARA in March 2006, by which time Elias was 27 and placed in removal proceedings.
Elias conceded removability but claimed derivative NACARA relief; immigration judge (IJ) denied relief because Elias was over 21 when his father’s NACARA relief was granted.
Elias argued the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) should be applied to compute his age as of his father’s application date (so he would have been under 21), and also raised equal protection/due process claims.
The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the IJ, holding CSPA does not apply to NACARA beneficiaries and declining to reach the constitutional arguments; petition for review followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether CSPA applies to NACARA derivative beneficiaries	CSPA should govern age calculation so Elias is treated as a child (age measured from parent’s application date)	CSPA’s text lists specific INA provisions and does not reference NACARA; therefore it does not apply	CSPA does not apply to NACARA; plain statutory text controls
Whether treating NACARA beneficiaries differently violates equal protection component of Due Process	Denial of CSPA to NACARA beneficiaries is arbitrary and denies equal protection	Immigration classifications are plenary and subject to rational-basis review; Congress may rationally distinguish NACARA from CSPA-covered relief	No equal protection violation; classification is rationally related to legitimate government purposes

De Osorio v. Mayorkas, 695 F.3d 1003 (9th Cir. 2012) (describing CSPA purpose to protect derivative beneficiaries from "aging out")
Lamie v. U.S. Trustee, 540 U.S. 526 (2004) (plain statutory language controls judicial interpretation)
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984) (deference framework for agency interpretations)
Matthews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67 (1976) (deference and relaxed scrutiny for immigration-related classifications)
Midi v. Holder, 566 F.3d 132 (4th Cir. 2009) (upholding denial of CSPA protection to a similar statutory class as rational)
Jimenez-Angeles v. Ashcroft, 291 F.3d 594 (9th Cir. 2002) (discussing congressional line-drawing in immigration)
INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 (1992) (describing burdens for asylum applicants)