20-301 Li v. Garland BIA Horton, IJ A214 624 045 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 13th day of May, two thousand twenty-one. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 JON O. NEWMAN, 8 MICHAEL H. PARK, 9 STEVEN J. MENASHI, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 ZENGKUI LI, AKA ZENG KUI LI, 14 Petitioner, 15 16 v. 20-301 17 18 MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED 19 STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 20 Respondent. 21 _____________________________________ 22 23 FOR PETITIONER: Jean Wang, Wang Law Office, PLLC, 24 Flushing, NY. 25 26 FOR RESPONDENT: Ethan P. Davis, Acting Assistant 27 Attorney General; Anthony C. Payne, 28 Assistant Director; Colette J. 29 Winston, Trial Attorney, Office of 1 Immigration Litigation, United 2 States Department of Justice, 3 Washington, DC. 4 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 5 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 6 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 7 is DENIED in part and DISMISSED in remaining part. 8 Petitioner Zengkui Li, a native of the People’s Republic 9 of China and a citizen of Canada, seeks review of a January 10 21, 2020 decision of the BIA affirming an August 21, 2019 11 decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his 12 application for adjustment to lawful permanent resident 13 status. In re Zengkui Li, No. A 214 624 045 (B.I.A. Jan 21, 14 2020), aff’g No. A 214 624 045 (Immig. Ct. N.Y.C. Aug 21, 15 2019). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the 16 underlying facts and procedural history. 17 We have reviewed the IJ’s decision as supplemented by 18 the BIA. See Yan Chen v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d 19 Cir. 2005). The agency may adjust the status of certain 20 aliens with immediately available immigrant visas to that of 21 lawful permanent residents. See 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a). 22 “[A]djustment of status [is] . . . a two-step process, 23 involving first, proof of an alien’s statutory eligibility 2 1 for the adjustment, and second, an exercise of discretion by 2 the Attorney General as to whether to grant such relief.” 3 Singh v. Gonzales, 468 F.3d 135, 138 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal 4 quotation marks omitted). …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals