8 C.F.R. § 248.1

Eligibility

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

(a) General. Except for those classes enumerated in § 248.2, any alien lawfully admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant, including an alien who acquired such status pursuant to section 247 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1257, who is continuing to maintain his or her nonimmigrant status, may apply to have his or her nonimmigrant classification changed to any nonimmigrant classification other than that of a spouse or fianc(e), or the child of such alien, under section 101(a)(15)(K) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(K), or as an alien in transit under section 101(a)(15)(C) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(C). An alien defined by section 101(a)(15)(V), or 101(a)(15)(U) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(V) or 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(U), may be accorded nonimmigrant status in the United States by following the procedures set forth respectively in § 214.15(f) or § 214.14 of this chapter.

(b) Except in the case of an alien applying to obtain V nonimmigrant status in the United States under § 214.15(f) of this chapter, a change of status may not be approved for an alien who failed to maintain the previously accorded status or whose status expired before the application or petition was filed, except that failure to file before the period of previously authorized status expired may be excused in the discretion of USCIS, and without separate application, where it is demonstrated at the time of filing that:

(1) The failure to file a timely application was due to extraordinary circumstances beyond the control of the applicant or petitioner, and USCIS finds the delay commensurate with the circumstances;

(2) The alien has not otherwise violated his or her nonimmigrant status;

(3) The alien remains a bona fide nonimmigrant; and

(4) The alien is not the subject of removal proceedings under 8 CFR part 240.

(c) Change of nonimmigrant classification to that of a nonimmigrant student. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, a nonimmigrant applying for a change of classification as an F-1 or M-1 student is not considered ineligible for such a change solely because the applicant may have started attendance at school before the application was submitted. USCIS will deny an application for a change to classification as an M-1 student if the applicant intends to pursue the course of study solely in order to qualify for a subsequent change of nonimmigrant classification to that of an alien temporary worker under section 101(a)(15)(H) of the Act. Furthermore, an alien may not change from classification as an M-1 student to that of an F-1 student.

(2) [Reserved]

(3) A nonimmigrant who is admitted as, or changes status to, a B-1 or B-2 nonimmigrant on or after April 12, 2002, or who files a request to extend the period of authorized stay as a B-1 or B-2 nonimmigrant on or after such date, may not pursue a course of study at an approved school unless the Service has approved his or her application for change of status to a classification as an F-1 or M-1 student. USCIS will deny the change of status if the B-1 or B-2 nonimmigrant enrolled in a course of study before filing the application for change of status or while the application is pending.

(d) Application for change of nonimmigrant classification from that of a student under section 101(a)(15)(M)(i) to that described in section 101(a)(15)(H). A district director shall deny an application for change of nonimmigrant classification from that of an M-1 student to that of an alien temporary worker under section 101(a)(15)(H) of the Act if the education or training which the student received while an M-1 student enables the student to meet the qualifications for temporary worker classification under section 101(a)(15)(H) of the Act.

(e) Change of nonimmigrant classification to that as described in section 101(a)(15)(N). An application for change to N status shall not be denied on the grounds the applicant is an intending immigrant. Change of status shall be granted for three years not to exceed termination of eligibility under section 101(a)(15)(N) of the Act. Employment authorization pursuant to section 274(A) of the Act may be granted to an alien accorded nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)(N) of the Act. Employment authorization is automatically terminated when the alien changes status or is no longer eligible for classification under section 101(a)(15)(N) of the Act.

[86 FR 14228, Mar. 15, 2021]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1971–2024 · leading case: L.A. Closeout, Inc. v. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 513 F.3d 940 (9th Cir. 2008).
L.A. Closeout, Inc. v. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 513 F.3d 940 (9th Cir. 2008). · cites it 5× “Appellants first claim that CIS’s use of an internal memorandum (the “Pearson memorandum”) interpreting 8 C.F.R. § 248.1 violated the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.”
Abolfazl Salehpour v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 761 F.2d 1442 (9th Cir. 1985). · cites it 6× “The INS also asserts that 8 C.F.R. § 248.1 , 4 which interprets 8 U.”
Compton James Richards v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 554 F.2d 1173 (D.C. Cir. 1977). “8 C.F.R. § 248.1 (b) (1975). 27 . See notes 2, 25 supra.”
Arie SHAAR; Helina Shaar; Shay Moshe Shaar, Petitioners, v. Immigr. & NATURALIZATION Serv., Respondent, 141 F.3d 953 (9th Cir. 1998). “1 ; 8 C.F.R. § 248.1 ). As suggested by the American Immigration Lawyers Association, as amicus before the BIA, the filing of a meritorious motion may be interpreted to toll the period for voluntary departure.”
Youssefi v. Renaud, 794 F. Supp. 2d 585 (D. Maryland 2011). · cites it 10× “” 8 C.F.R. § 248.1 (a). The regulation also states that “a change of status may not be approved for an alien who failed to maintain the previously accorded status or whose status expired before the application or petition was filed, except that failure to file before the period…”
Unification Church v. Attorney Gen. for the United States, 581 F.2d 870 (D.C. Cir. 1978). · cites it 2× “See 8 C.F.R. § 248.1 (a), (b), (1977), note 15 infra.”
Jose Garavito v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 901 F.2d 173 (1st Cir. 1990). “authorize a change from any nonimmi-grant classification to any other nonimmi-grant classification_”); 8 C.F.R. § 248.1 (providing for changes between nonimmi-grant classifications).”
Mahmood v. Morris, 477 F. Supp. 702 (E.D. Pa. 1979). “8 C.F.R. § 248.1 (b). The District Director determined that plaintiff’s behavior was inconsistent with his stated purpose of visiting for pleasure and therefore was ineligible for adjustment of his nonimmigrant status.”
L.A. Closeout, Inc. v. Dep't of Homeland (9th Cir. 2008). · cites it 6× “DHS dum (the “Pearson memorandum”) interpreting 8 C.F.R. § 248.1 violated the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.”
Eyoum v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 125 F.3d 889 (5th Cir. 1997). · cites it 3× “Eyoum also argues that his eligibility for admission as a “treaty investor” requires that his nonimmigrant status be adjusted pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 248.1 , However, as the BIA explained, Eyoum never applied for status as a treaty investor.”
Tomeh v. United States Dep't of Homeland Sec., 321 F. App'x 620 (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 4× “” 8 C.F.R. § 248.1 (a). The regulations further state that “a change of status may not be approved for an alien who failed to maintain the previously accorded status or whose status expired before the application or' petition was filed.”
Adtrav Corp. v. United States Citizenship & Immigr. Servs. (N.D. Ala. 2022). · cites it 2× “ADTRAV relies on 8 C.F.R. § 248.1 (b), which states: (b) Except in the case of an alien applying to obtain V nonimmigration status in the United States under § 214.”
— 8 C.F.R. § 248.1(b) — 2 cases
Tomeh v. United States Dep't of Homeland Sec., 321 F. App'x 620 (9th Cir. 2009). “” 8 C.F.R. § 248.1 (a). The regulations further state that “a change of status may not be approved for an alien who failed to maintain the previously accorded status or whose status expired before the application or' petition was filed.”
Tomeh v. United States Dep't of Homeland Sec., 321 F. App'x 620 (9th Cir. 2009).
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.