Feimei Li v. Renaud
654 F.3d 376
| 2d Cir. | 2011Background
- CSPA § 1153(h)(3) allows automatic conversion and retention of a priority date for a beneficiary who ages out, under certain conditions.
- Cen, derivative on Feimei Li’s grandfather Yong Li’s 1994 petition, aged out as a derivative beneficiary before a visa became available.
- Feimei Li filed a 2008 petition for Cen seeking a 1994 priority date; USCIS instead assigned a 2008 priority date.
- District Court dismissed for failure to state a claim, applying Chevron deferential review to the BIA's Wang interpretation.
- Second Circuit evaluated whether § 1153(h)(3) permits retention when the derivative’s petition cannot be converted to an appropriate category because no grandchild category exists.
- Court affirms district court, holding Cen cannot retain the 1994 priority date because there is no appropriate category to convert to for a derivative beneficiary of a grandparent’s petition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 1153(h)(3) permits retention of the 1994 priority date for Cen. | Li argues Cen should retain the 1994 date. | Government contends no retention because no appropriate category for conversion exists. | No retention; no appropriate category for Cen to convert to. |
| Whether the BIA’s Wang interpretation governs here. | Li favors Wang’s interpretation. | Court should limit deference; Congress spoke clearly. | Chevron deference not controlling; statute unambiguously disfavors retention in this context. |
| Whether § 1153(h)(3) contemplates automatic conversion when the petitioner changes (different beneficiary petition). | Feimei Li/AIC argue conversion and retention are distinct benefits | The statute requires conversion to the appropriate category tied to the same petition | Conversion to the appropriate category cannot apply to a petition filed by a different petitioner. |
Key Cases Cited
- Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (U.S. 1984) (court defers to agency interpretations only if ambiguity remains after traditional tools of construction)
- INS v. Aguirre-Aguirre, 526 U.S. 415 (U.S. 1999) (agency interpretation given Chevron deference where agency has delegated authority)
- Mead Corp. v. United States, 533 U.S. 218 (U.S. 2001) (limits on when Chevron deference applies)
- Drax v. Reno, 338 F.3d 98 (2d Cir. 2003) ( precedential support for USCIS petition processing and priority date concepts)
- Matter of Wang, 25 I. & N. Dec. 28 (BIA 2009) (BIA interpretation of automatic conversion and retention under § 1153(h)(3))
- Bolvito v. Mukasey, 527 F.3d 428 (5th Cir. 2008) (context on derivative beneficiaries and priority dates)