NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 25 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT AMMAR YOSSEF HACHICHO, No. 18-71724 Petitioner, Agency No. A097-607-794 v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted May 6, 2020 Pasadena, California Before: GOULD and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges, and STEIN,** District Judge. Ammar Hachicho, a native and citizen of Syria, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal from the denial of his applications for relief from removal by the immigration judge (IJ). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for review and remand for further * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Sidney H. Stein, United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation. proceedings. 1. The BIA did not err in concluding that section 245(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1255(d), bars Hachicho from adjusting his status through his current marriage to a U.S. citizen. We review this legal determination de novo. See Garcia-Martinez v. Sessions, 886 F.3d 1291, 1293 (9th Cir. 2018). Section 245(d) provides that “the Attorney General may not adjust . . . the status of a nonimmigrant alien described in section 1101(a)(15)(K) of this title except to that of an alien lawfully admitted to the United States on a conditional basis under section 1186a of this title as a result of the marriage of the nonimmigrant.” 8 U.S.C. § 1255(d); see also id. § 1186a(a)(1), (c). Section 245(d) also provides that “[t]he Attorney General may not adjust . . . the status of an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence on a conditional basis under section 1186a of this title.” Id. § 1255(d). In other words, under section 245(d), a K-1 visa holder may not adjust her status to anything but conditional permanent resident (CPR) status, and a CPR, in turn, may not obtain any further adjustments of status. See id. Here, Hachicho was first admitted to the United States as “a nonimmigrant alien described in section 1101(a)(15)(K)”—that is, a K-1 visa holder. Id. Hachicho’s later adjustment to CPR status did not render section 245(d) 2 inapplicable, because even if that adjustment constituted a new admission, he would then be “an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence on a conditional basis.” Id. Thus, the BIA did not err in concluding that section 245(d) continues to bar Hachicho’s adjustment. 2. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in determining that Hachicho’s California assault conviction constituted a “particularly serious crime” under the INA. In reviewing this determination, we consider only “whether ‘the agency relied on the appropriate factors and proper evidence to reach [its] conclusion.’” Flores-Vega v. Barr, 932 F.3d 878, ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals