8 C.F.R. § 246.2
Allegations admitted; no answer filed; no hearing requested
If the answer admits the allegations in the notice, or if no answer is filed within the thirty-day period, or if no hearing is requested within such period, the district director or asylum office director shall rescind the adjustment of status previously granted, and no appeal shall lie from his decision.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1967–2010 · leading case: Estrada v. Holder, 604 F.3d 402 (7th Cir. 2010).
Estrada v. Holder, 604 F.3d 402 (7th Cir. 2010). “But the immigration agency never heard from Cueto Estrada, and in 1996 the INS rescinded his peramanentresident status without a hearing as permitted by 8 C.F.R. § 246.2 . Cueto Estrada claims he never received the 1995 notice and says he first learned that he had lost his…”
Omar Ahmed Ali, Also Known as Omar Abdel Rahman, Also Known as Omar Abdel Rachman v. Janet Reno, Attorney Gen. of the United States, 22 F.3d 442 (2d Cir. 1994). “8 C.F.R. § 246.2 . Moreover, the January 17 letter *447 does not put the INS on notice that the allegations were contested.”
Zbigniew Szczesny v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen. of the United States, 358 F.3d 464 (7th Cir. 2004). “The district director never received a response to the notice, and accordingly he rescinded Szczesny’s permanent resident status without a hearing pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 246.2 (1995). Szczesny asserts that he was unable to respond because he never received notice of the proposed…”
Ali v. Reno, 829 F. Supp. 1415 (S.D.N.Y. 1993). “8 C.F.R. § 246.2 (emphasis added). The language of the Regulation is compulsory — If no answer is filed or no hearing is requested, the District Director shall rescind Petitioner’s lawful resident status.”
Masri, 22 I. & N. Dec. 1145 (BIA 1999). “8 C.F.R. § 246.2 (1999). However, if a respondent contests the notice to rescind and/or requests a hearing, then jurisdiction vests with the Immigration Judge “to determine whether adjustment of status shall be rescinded.”
Gottesman v. Fischer, 922 F. Supp. 605 (N.D. Ga. 1996). “8 C.F.R. § 246.2 . In this instance, the INS argued that plaintiffs marriage to Holland was fraudulent because he married her merely to gain permanent legal status.”
Candido Pereira-Barreira v. United States Dep't of Just., Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 523 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1975). “By a letter dated July 11, 1972, the INS rescinded Barreira’s status as a lawful permanent resident pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 246.2 (1975). He was granted the privilege of voluntary departure until July 26, 1972.”
Quan, 12 I. & N. Dec. 487 (BIA 1967). “When she failed to respond, the District Director on March 20, 1967 ordered that the adjustment of status which had been granted the applicant on March 1, 1963 be rescinded, in accordance with section 246 of the Act and 8 CFR 246.2. The matter is now before me on certification,…”
Singh v. Quarantillo, 92 F. Supp. 2d 386 (D.N.J. 2000). “8 C.F.R. § 246.2 (a)(2). By the same token the motion for reopening of deportation proceedings should have been held in abeyance.”
Singh v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 456 F.2d 1092 (9th Cir. 1972). “Under 8 C.F.R. § 246.2 admission by the alien of the district director’s allegations or failure to answer them within thirty days results in rescission of the adjustment of status.”
Domingo Cueto Estrada v. Eric Holder, Jr. (7th Cir. 2010). “But the immigration agency never heard from Cueto Estrada, and in 1996 the INS rescinded his peramanent-resident status without a hearing as permitted by 8 C.F.R. § 246.2 . Cueto Estrada claims he never received the 1995 notice and says he first learned that he had lost his…”
Szczesny, Zbigniew v. Ashcroft, John (7th Cir. 2004). “03-1047 received a response to the notice, and accordingly he rescinded Szczesny’s permanent resident status without a hearing pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 246.2 (1995). Szczesny asserts that he was unable to respond because he never received notice of the proposed action.”
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.