Jose Sanchez v. Secretary United States Depart, 967 F.3d 242

Jose Sanchez and Sonia Gonzalez, Salvadoran nationals, entered the U.S. without inspection in 1997/1998 and later received Temporary Protected Status (TPS) after 2001 earthquakes.
TPS was periodically extended, allowing them to remain and be treated as "being in, and maintaining, lawful status as a nonimmigrant" under 8 U.S.C. § 1254a(f)(4).
In 2014 Sanchez applied to adjust status to lawful permanent resident under 8 U.S.C. § 1255; USCIS denied the application because he had not been "admitted" into the United States; Gonzalez’s application depended on his.
The District Court granted summary judgment for Plaintiffs, holding a grant of TPS satisfies § 1255(a)’s requirement that an alien be "inspected and admitted or paroled."
The Third Circuit reverses, holding TPS does not constitute an "admission" under § 1255, and Plaintiffs are ineligible for adjustment based on lack of admission.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a grant of TPS constitutes an "admission" under § 1255	Sanchez: TPS conferral functions as an admission; TPS places beneficiary in lawful nonimmigrant status that should be treated as an admission	Govt: "Admission" per § 1101(a)(13)(A) means physical entry after inspection and authorization; TPS only confers status, not entry	Held: TPS is not an "admission." Admission requires physical entry after inspection; TPS confers status only
Whether Plaintiffs are eligible to adjust status under § 1255(k) (exception for those present pursuant to lawful admission)	Sanchez: TPS satisfies lawful-admission requirement at time of filing	Govt: Plaintiffs were not lawfully admitted; TPS does not satisfy § 1255(k)	Held: Plaintiffs are ineligible under § 1255(k) because they were never admitted

Hanif v. Attorney General, 694 F.3d 479 (3d Cir. 2012) (distinguishes admission as physical entry from acquiring status)
Taveras v. Attorney General, 731 F.3d 281 (3d Cir. 2013) ("admission" involves physical entry; status date differs)
De Leon-Ochoa v. Attorney General, 622 F.3d 341 (3d Cir. 2010) (TPS shields aliens already present; not a program of entry)
Flores v. USCIS, 718 F.3d 548 (6th Cir. 2013) (held TPS can satisfy § 1255 admission requirement; Third Circuit disagrees)
Ramirez v. Brown, 852 F.3d 954 (9th Cir. 2017) (held TPS conferral equates to admission; Third Circuit rejects that reading)
Serrano v. Attorney General, 655 F.3d 1260 (11th Cir. 2011) (per curiam) (TPS confers lawful status but does not satisfy § 1255(a)’s admission requirement)
Gomez v. Lynch, 831 F.3d 652 (5th Cir. 2016) (explains distinction between admission as an event and status as permission)
Negrete-Ramirez v. Holder, 741 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2014) (Ninth Circuit precedent permitting alternative statutory constructions; relied on by Ramirez)
I.N.S. v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421 (1987) (canon: inclusion in one provision and omission in another implies congressional intent)
Hibbs v. Winn, 542 U.S. 88 (2004) (statutory construction avoids rendering provisions superfluous)