C.F.R. » Title 8 » CHAPTER I—DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY › SUBCHAPTER B—IMMIGRATION REGULATIONS › PART 274a—CONTROL OF EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS › Subpart B—Employment Authorization

8 C.F.R. § 274a.14

Termination of employment authorization

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

(a) Automatic termination of employment authorization. (1) Employment authorization granted under § 274a.12(c) of this chapter shall automatically terminate upon the occurrence of one of the following events:

(i) The expiration date specified by the Service on the employment authorization document is reached;

(ii) Exclusion or deportation proceedings are instituted (however, this shall not preclude the authorization of employment pursuant to § 274a.12(c) of this part where appropriate); or

(iii) The alien is granted voluntary departure.

(2) Termination of employment authorization pursuant to this paragraph does not require the service of a notice of intent to revoke; employment authorization terminates upon the occurrence of any event enumerated in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.

However, automatic revocation under this section does not preclude reapplication for employment authorization under § 274.12(c) of this part.

(b) Revocation of employment authorization—(1) Basis for revocation of employment authorization. Employment authorization granted under § 274a.12(c) of this chapter may be revoked by the district director:

(i) Prior to the expiration date, when it appears that any condition upon which it was granted has not been met or no longer exists, or for good cause shown; or

(ii) Upon a showing that the information contained in the application is not true and correct.

(2) Notice of intent to revoke employment authorization. When a district director determines that employment authorization should be revoked prior to the expiration date specified by the Service, he or she shall serve written notice of intent to revoke the employment authorization. The notice will cite the reasons indicating that revocation is warranted. The alien will be granted a period of fifteen days from the date of service of the notice within which to submit countervailing evidence. The decision by the district director shall be final and no appeal shall lie from the decision to revoke the authorization.

(c) Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987. (1) Temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987, pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c) (§ 109.1(b) contained in the 8 CFR edition revised as of January 1, 1987), shall automatically terminate on the date specified by the Service on the document issued to the alien, or on December 31, 1996, whichever is earlier. Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization does not preclude a subsequent application for temporary employment authorization.

(2) A document issued by the Service prior to June 1, 1987, that authorized temporary employment authorization for any period beyond December 31, 1996, is null and void pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The alien shall be issued a new employment authorization document upon application to the Service if the alien is eligible for temporary employment authorization pursuant to 274A.12(c).

(3) No notice of intent to revoke is necessary for the automatic termination of temporary employment authorization pursuant to this part.

[52 FR 16221, May 1, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 8614, Mar. 16, 1988; 53 FR 20087, June 1, 1988; 61 FR 46537, Sept. 4, 1996; 85 FR 38628, June 26, 2020; 87 FR 57799, Sept. 22, 2022]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1989–2025 · leading case: Guevara v. Holder, 649 F.3d 1086 (9th Cir. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Guevara v. Holder, 649 F.3d 1086 (9th Cir. 2011). · cites it 3× “12(c) may also have their grant of employment authorization terminated or revoked at any time under the criteria set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 274a.14, which includes, but is not limited to: (1) a preset expiration date; (2) initiation of deportation proceedings; (3) a showing of good…”
Alfaro-Orellana v. Ilchert, 720 F. Supp. 792 (N.D. Cal. 1989). “Second, defendant asserts that by December 19, 1988, deportation proceedings had been instituted against each plaintiff. Defendant argues that upon the initiation of deportation proceedings, any work authorizations previously granted to plaintiffs under 8 C.”
Ahmed v. Noem (D.D.C. 2025). · cites it 6× “During the August 1, 2025, status hearing, the government took a slightly different position, citing 8 C.F.R. §274a.14 to make the blanket argument that while the plaintiff can apply for work reauthorization, the initiation of removal proceedings against him precludes him from…”
Kondapally v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigr. Servs. (D.D.C. 2020). “See 8 C.F.R. § 274a.14(b)(1)(i). 3 Plaintiff contends that “[t]he equitable authority of the courts preserved by 5 U.”
Ray v. Cuccinelli (N.D. Cal. 2020). “Except as otherwise 23 provided in this chapter or by law, notwithstanding 8 CFR 274a.14(a)(1)(i), the validity period of an expiring Employment Authorization Document (Form I–766) and, for 24 aliens who are not employment authorized incident to status, also the attendant…”
Anora v. Oasis Prof'l Mgmt. Grp., Ltd. (S.D.N.Y. 2023). “However, Plaintiff here had an EAD, which is valid until expiration unless separately revoked, see 8 CFR § 274a.14(b), and there is evidence to suggest that he thought he could work so long as his EAD was unexpired.”
Hamad v. Sec'y, Dep't of Homeland Sec. (S.D. Ohio 2021). “8 C.F.R. § 274a.14(b)(1)(i). Plaintiff Raida Hamad is a U.”
— 8 C.F.R. § 274a.14(1)(ii) — 1 case
Alfaro-Orellana v. Ilchert, 720 F. Supp. 792 (N.D. Cal. 1989). “Second, defendant asserts that by December 19, 1988, deportation proceedings had been instituted against each plaintiff. Defendant argues that upon the initiation of deportation proceedings, any work authorizations previously granted to plaintiffs under 8 C.”
— 8 C.F.R. § 274a.14(a) — 1 case
Guevara v. Holder, 649 F.3d 1086 (9th Cir. 2011). “12(c) may also have their grant of employment authorization terminated or revoked at any time under the criteria set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 274a.14, which includes, but is not limited to: (1) a preset expiration date; (2) initiation of deportation proceedings; (3) a showing of good…”
— 8 C.F.R. § 274a.14(a)(1)(i) — 1 case
Ray v. Cuccinelli (N.D. Cal. 2020). “Except as otherwise 23 provided in this chapter or by law, notwithstanding 8 CFR 274a.14(a)(1)(i), the validity period of an expiring Employment Authorization Document (Form I–766) and, for 24 aliens who are not employment authorized incident to status, also the attendant…”
— 8 C.F.R. § 274a.14(a)(1)(ii) — 1 case
Ahmed v. Noem (D.D.C. 2025). “During the August 1, 2025, status hearing, the government took a slightly different position, citing 8 C.F.R. §274a.14 to make the blanket argument that while the plaintiff can apply for work reauthorization, the initiation of removal proceedings against him precludes him from…”
— 8 C.F.R. § 274a.14(b) — 1 case
Anora v. Oasis Prof'l Mgmt. Grp., Ltd. (S.D.N.Y. 2023). “However, Plaintiff here had an EAD, which is valid until expiration unless separately revoked, see 8 CFR § 274a.14(b), and there is evidence to suggest that he thought he could work so long as his EAD was unexpired.”
— 8 C.F.R. § 274a.14(b)(1)(i) — 2 cases
Kondapally v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigr. Servs. (D.D.C. 2020). “See 8 C.F.R. § 274a.14(b)(1)(i). 3 Plaintiff contends that “[t]he equitable authority of the courts preserved by 5 U.”
Hamad v. Sec'y, Dep't of Homeland Sec. (S.D. Ohio 2021). “8 C.F.R. § 274a.14(b)(1)(i). Plaintiff Raida Hamad is a U.”
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.