Caraballo-Tavera v. Holder
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 12296
2d Cir.2012Background
- Caraballo-Tavera, a Dominican national, entered the U.S. on a K-1 fiancé visa and married within 90 days.
- He adjusted to conditional lawful permanent resident status in December 1999, but the marriage ended in 2001.
- DHS denied his waiver of the joint petition to remove conditions in 2005, terminating his CLPR status and initiating removal proceedings in 2006.
- He sought adjustment of status based on his daughter's approved immigrant visa petition, arguing eligibility apart from the K-1 marriage.
- BIA and IJ denied adjustment under 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a); this petition for review followed.
- This court held that K-1 holders may only adjust to LPR via the marriage path; Caraballo-Tavera remains subject to § 1255(d).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does §1255(d) bar non-marital adjustment for K-1 holders? | Caraballo-Tavera argues he is not subject to §1255(d) after CLPR status. | Holder contends §1255(d) applies to all K-1 admits, preventing any basis other than marriage. | Bar applies; ineligible to adjust except via marriage. |
| Is Matter of Stockwell applicable to this case? | Caraballo-Tavera relies on Stockwell to permit adjustment despite CLPR termination. | Stockwell distinguished; not controlling in K-1 context. | Stockwell inapplicable. |
| Does 8 C.F.R. § 245.1(c)(6) compel a different result? | Argues regulation allows adjustment notwithstanding §1255(d). | Regulation bars adjustment for K-1 holders except via marriage. | Regulation supports ineligibility. |
| Can Caraballo-Tavera adjust based on his daughter's petition? | Petition relies on an immigrant visa petition independent of marriage. | Such adjustment is barred unless through the marriage path for K-1 holders. | Not permitted; adjustment denied. |
| Do other cited cases alter the result? | Argues for broader or different interpretations of §1255(d). | Cited authorities do not override the plain statutory bar for K-1 holders. | No; statutory text controls. |
Key Cases Cited
- Birdsong v. Holder, 641 F.3d 957 (8th Cir. 2011) (supports §1255(d) restriction on non-marital adjustment for K-1 holders)
- Kalal v. Gonzales, 402 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2005) (K-1 out-of-status holder must follow K-1 process for LPR)
- Choin v. Mukasey, 537 F.3d 1116 (9th Cir. 2008) (reinforces plain language of §1255(d) restricting adjustment)
- Markovski v. Gonzales, 486 F.3d 108 (4th Cir. 2007) (recognizes restrictive scheme for K-1 visa adjustments)