FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT WOUL SOO PARK, No. 18-55914 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 2:16-cv-09329- SJO-FFM WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General; CHAD F. WOLF; KEN CUCCINELLI ; SUSAN M. CURDA; OPINION CORINNA LUNA, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California S. James Otero, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted November 5, 2019 Pasadena, California Filed January 7, 2019 Before: Jerome Farris, M. Margaret McKeown, and Barrington D. Parker, Jr.,* Circuit Judges. Per Curiam Opinion * The Honorable Barrington D. Parker, Jr., United States Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, sitting by designation. 2 PARK V. BARR SUMMARY** Immigration The panel reversed the district court’s denial of Woul Park’s petition challenging a decision by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) denying her application for naturalization, and remanded, holding that: a B-2 nonimmigrant whose lawful status has lapsed is precluded from establishing lawful domicile in California by operation of federal law; and, therefore, Park’s divorce and subsequent marriage to a U.S. citizen were valid under California law, she was properly admitted for permanent residency, and is entitled to naturalization. Park, a Korean citizen, married Byung Gug Choi in Korea, and later came to the United States on a B-2 tourist visa in 2003. She overstayed her visa and has resided in California ever since. Park and Choi obtained a valid divorce under Korean law, and Park later married James Yong Park, a U.S. citizen, in California and received lawful permanent residency based on that marriage. USCIS then denied Park’s application for naturalization. USCIS found that Park and Choi were California domiciliaries when their Korean divorce decree was executed and, as a result, the divorce could not be recognized under California law. Having determined that Park’s divorce was invalid, USCIS concluded that her marriage to James Yong Park was similarly invalid, and therefore, Park was never ** This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. PARK V. BARR 3 lawfully admitted for permanent residency. Accordingly, USCIS denied Park’s application for naturalization because she could not satisfy the requirement of having been lawfully admitted for permanent residency. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the Government. The panel observed that the case turned on whether Park was “domiciled” in California and that the validity of Park’s marriage to James Yong Park was governed by California law. The panel explained that, under California law, domicile is established by physical presence and an intention to remain indefinitely. However, the panel further explained that federal immigration laws impose outer limits on a state’s freedom to define it. Here, the B-2 tourist visa classification requires nonimmigrants to maintain a residence in their country of citizenship with no intention of abandoning it. It follows, the panel explained, that Congress has not permitted B-2 nonimmigrants to lawfully form a subjective intent ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals