Mehanna v. Dedvukaj, 2010 WL 4940016 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 30, 2010).
In this case, an LPR mother filed an I-130 petition for her son. After the filing of the petition, the son married a USC and immigrated as a conditional resident. The marriage was later annulled and his conditional status was terminated. He then tried to adjust through the I-130 petition filed for him by his mother. He is now in removal proceedings.
The alien advanced the argument that because his marriage was annulled, his marriage did not automatically revoke the I-130 petition filed by his mother. 8 C.F.R. s 205.1(a)(3)(i)(I).
The court found that the decision to revoke an approved I-130 petition is a discretionary decision insulated from judicial review. INA s 242(a)(2)(B)(ii). Because INA s 205 states that the Secretary of the DHS "may" revoke a petition "at any time" "for good and sufficient cause," this power is discretionary. The court did not consider that this jurisdiction stripping statute concerns review of removal orders. It rejected the argument that revocation under 205.1 is mandatory, not discretionary. The court did not cite to Bangura v. Hansen, 434 F.3d 487 (6th Cir. 2006).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment