(a) Preference applicant. The priority date of a preference visa applicant under INA 203 (a) or (b) shall be the fiing date of the approved petition that accorded preference status.
(b) Former Western Hemisphere applicant with priority date prior to January 1, 1977. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, an alien who, prior to January 1, 1977, was subject to the numerical limitation specified in section 21(e) of the Act of October 3, 1965, and who was registered as a Western Hemisphere immigrant with a priority date prior to January 1, 1977, shall retain that priority date as a preference immigrant upon approval of a petition according status under INA 203 (a) or (b).
(c) Derivative priority date for spouse or child of principal alien. A spouse or child of a principal alien acquired prior to the principal alien's admission shall be entitled to the priority date of the principal alien, whether or not named in the immigrant visa application of the principal alien. A child born of a marriage which existed at the time of a principal alien's admission to the United States is considered to have been acquired prior to the principal alien's admission.
Notes of Decisions
Scialabba v. Cuellar De Osorio, 134 S. Ct. 2191 (2014).
· cites it 2× “1 (b) (2014); 22 CFR § 42.53 (a) (2013). Priority dates are therefore crucial-the earlier one's priority date, the sooner one's place will come up in line and a visa will be available.”
Bolvito v. Mukasey, 527 F.3d 428 (5th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 2× “”); 22 C.F.R. § 42.53 (a) (“The priority date of a preference visa applicant under INA 203(a) or (b) shall be the filing date of the approved petition that accorded preference status.”
Jigar Babaria v. Antony Blinken, 87 F.4th 963 (9th Cir. 2023).
“1(g)(2); 22 C.F.R. § 42.53 (a). Based on the number of available visas and the priority dates of those in the queue, the State Department determines cutoff dates for each country in each preference category.”
Gebre v. Rice, 462 F. Supp. 2d 186 (D. Mass. 2006).
“§ 1151 (b)(2)(A)(l); 22 C.F.R. § 42.53 . Moreover, that the Government accepted Teg-ebelu’s application fee tendered at Gebre’s interview at the U.”
Solorio v. Lynch, 194 F. Supp. 3d 1038 (E.D. Cal. 2016).
“" 22 C.F.R. § 42.53 . . See, e.g., U.S. Dep’t of State, Visa Bulletin, available at https://travel.”
Scialabba v. Cuellar De Osorio (2014).
· cites it 2× “1 (b) (2014); 22 CFR §42.53 (a) (2013). Priority dates are therefore crucial—the earlier one’s priority date, the sooner one’s place will come up in line and a visa will be available.”
Angeles v. Johnson, 121 F. Supp. 3d 997 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
· cites it 2× “This argument, grounded - in 22 C.F.R. § 42.53 (c), first appeared in the Agency’s Notices of Intent to Deny issued on April 10, 2013 [Doc.”
Wang v. Pompeo (D.D.C. 2020).
“§ 1153 (b)(5); 22 C.F.R. § 42.53 (a). The INA limits the number of immigrant visas issued each year.”
Li v. Blinken (D.D.C. 2023).
“The petition is given a “priority date,” 22 C.F.R. § 42.53 (a), which is the date the petition was filed with USCIS, 8 C.”
Tasneem (D. Mass. 2026).
“1 (b); 22 CFR 42.53(a)). Within the five family preference categories, the number of visas available for each year varies based on country with demand regularly outweighing supply.”
— 22 C.F.R. § 42.53(a) — 3 cases
Scialabba v. Cuellar De Osorio, 134 S. Ct. 2191 (2014).
“1 (b) (2014); 22 CFR § 42.53 (a) (2013). Priority dates are therefore crucial-the earlier one's priority date, the sooner one's place will come up in line and a visa will be available.”
Tasneem (D. Mass. 2026).
“1 (b); 22 CFR 42.53(a)). Within the five family preference categories, the number of visas available for each year varies based on country with demand regularly outweighing supply.”
Scialabba v. Cuellar De Osorio (2014).
“1 (b) (2014); 22 CFR §42.53 (a) (2013). Priority dates are therefore crucial—the earlier one’s priority date, the sooner one’s place will come up in line and a visa will be available.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.