C.F.R. » Title 42 » CHAPTER I—PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES › SUBCHAPTER C—MEDICAL CARE AND EXAMINATIONS › PART 34—MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF ALIENS

42 C.F.R. § 34.1

Applicability

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The provisions of this part shall apply to the medical examination of:

(a) Aliens applying for a visa at an embassy or consulate of the United States;

(b) Aliens arriving in the United States;

(c) Aliens required by DHS to have a medical examination in connection with the determination of their admissibility into the United States; and

(d) Aliens applying for adjustment of status.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1966–2019 · leading case: Clive Michael Boutilier v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 363 F.2d 488 (2d Cir. 1966).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Clive Michael Boutilier v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 363 F.2d 488 (2d Cir. 1966). “§ 1224 , which directs that certification of the physical and mental condition of “arriving aliens * * * shall be made by medical officers of the United States Public Health Service, who shall conduct all medical examinations and shall certify, for the information of the…”
Hill v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 714 F.2d 1470 (9th Cir. 1983). “See also 42 C.F.R. § 34.1 . Boutilier urges that if an exclusion proceeding is to be valid, adherence to these procedures is required.”
Kalu v. Warden Moshannon Valley Corr. Ctr., 661 F. App'x 780 (3d Cir. 2016). “, contract facility for the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”)), has been unable to obtain a medical examination by a civil surgeon, see 42 C.F.R. § 34.1 , necessary for an application for immigration relief, see 8 U.”
Brown v. Barr, No. 18-9580 (10th Cir. Sept. 17, 2019). “”); 42 C.F.R § 34.1(d) (providing that requirements regarding medical examinations apply to applicants for adjustment of status); Carpio v.”
42 C.F.R. § 34.1(d): 1 case
Brown v. Barr, No. 18-9580 (10th Cir. Sept. 17, 2019). “”); 42 C.F.R § 34.1(d) (providing that requirements regarding medical examinations apply to applicants for adjustment of status); Carpio v.”
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.