8 C.F.R. § 1208.8
Limitations on travel outside the United States
(a) An applicant who leaves the United States without first obtaining advance parole under § 212.5(f) of this chapter shall be presumed to have abandoned his or her application under this section.
(b) An applicant who leaves the United States pursuant to advance parole under § 1212.5(f) of this chapter and returns to the country of claimed persecution shall be presumed to have abandoned his or her application, unless the applicant is able to establish compelling reasons for such return.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2005–2021 · leading case: Shi Liang Lin v. United States Dep't of Just., 494 F.3d 296 (2d Cir. 2007).
Shi Liang Lin v. United States Dep't of Just., 494 F.3d 296 (2d Cir. 2007). “Petitioner Zou's petition has been remanded by the BIA to the immigration court to review its findings of adverse credibility and determine whether Zou qualifies as a refugee for "resistance" to a coercive family planning policy.”
Emiljan Precaj v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., 376 F. App'x 553 (6th Cir. 2010). “See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.8 (b) (“An asylum application shall be deemed to constitute at the same time an application for withholding of removal.”
Yesenia Payeras v. Jefferson B. Sessions, III, 899 F.3d 593 (8th Cir. 2018). “See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.8 (a) ("An applicant who leaves the United States without first obtaining advance parole under § 212.”
Arellano v. Holder, 492 F. App'x 818 (9th Cir. 2012). “4 (a)(2), and whether he abandoned his petition under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.8 (a) when he left the country (assuming that he did).”
Pierre v. Bureau of Immigr. & Customs Enf't, 267 F. App'x 163 (3rd Cir. 2008). “The Second Circuit concluded that “[g]iven that we do not retain jurisdiction over Lin’s claim if he has returned to China and has provided no explanation to overcome the presumption that his asylum application has been abandoned, see 8 C.F.R. § 1208.8 , 4 or if he *167 is…”
Rueda Mendoza v. Gonzales, 135 F. App'x 29 (9th Cir. 2005). “Because Rueda Mendoza did not obtain advance parole pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1208.8 (b), the IJ correctly presumed his asylum application to be abandoned pursuant to 8 C.”
Jose Martinez v. William Barr (9th Cir. 2020). “8 C.F.R. § 1208.8 (a). Moreover, Petitioner became ineligible for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture because both forms of relief, if granted, would prohibit Petitioner’s removal, which is no longer possible.”
Karen Mantachian v. Merrick Garland (9th Cir. 2021). “” 8 C.F.R. § 1208.8 (a).1 By using the word 1 The BIA also correctly rejected Mantachian’s argument that the regulation does not apply to him, finding that his second asylum application was a continuation of his first.”
Efrain Tax Lopez v. U.S. Attorney Gen., 327 F. App'x 844 (11th Cir. 2009). “See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.8 (a) (“An applicant who leaves the United States without first obtaining advance parole .”
Hui Li v. Eric H. Holder Jr., 489 F. App'x 186 (9th Cir. 2012). “See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.8 (a) (“An applicant who leaves the United States without first obtaining advance parole under § 212.”
Jimy Nunez-Castro v. Eric Holder, Jr., 510 F. App'x 549 (9th Cir. 2013). “See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.8 (a) (“An applicant who leaves the United States -without first obtaining advance parole .”
Teddy Lingga v. Eric Holder, Jr., 581 F. App'x 614 (9th Cir. 2014). “See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.8 . Pursuant to Ali’s request, we dismiss the petition for review as to Teddy Lingga.”
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.