Earlier this month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied to review a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) finding Pankajkumar Patel inadmissible and thus ineligible for relief from removal for falsely misrepresenting himself as a U.S. citizen when applying for a driver’s license. See Patel v. Att’y Gen., 3/6/19.
Patel entered the United States without inspection. Id. He later applied for a driver’s license in Georgia in 2008. Id. When applying for the license, Patel checked the box indicating that he was a U.S. citizen. Id. This incident arguably rendered Patel inadmissible pursuant to § 1182(a)(6)(c)(ii)(I), which states:
Any alien who falsely represents, or has falsely represented, himself or herself to be a citizen of the United States for any purpose or benefit under this chapter (including section 1324a of this title) or any other Federal or State law is inadmissible. Id.
The Department of Homeland Security consequently issued a Notice to Appear charging Patel as removable for being present in the United States without inspection. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i).
Patel conceded removability and sought discretionary relief by applying for adjustment of status under 8 U.S.C. § 1255(i). Section 1255 permits an alien who entered without inspection to obtain relief from removal if, among other things, the alien is the beneficiary of a labor certification. See § 1255(i)(1)(B)(ii).
Although Patel was the beneficiary of a labor certification and approved Form I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, the Court found that Patel was not able to demonstrate “clearly and beyond doubt” that he was not inadmissible. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(2).
The Board and Immigration Judge (“IJ”) rejected Patel’s arguments that: (1) he did not have the requisite subjective intent to make the false representation of citizenship; and (2) the false representation was not material to the purpose or benefit sought. See Patel v. Att’y Gen., 3/6/19.
The IJ determined that Patel was not credible, he was evasive when testifying, and that the evidence contradicted Patel’s testimony. Id. The IJ ultimately found that Patel willfully and purposefully indicated that he was a U.S. citizen and concluded the Court’s decision with the following statement:
“Patel’s argument that he does not qualify under the statute because his false representation was not material is, well, immaterial.” Id.
Lally Immigration is closely following the proceedings and will provide updates as they become available. If you need assistance preparing a driver’s license renewal application or preparing an application for adjustment of status, contact us at (617) 870-1000 or by email to [email protected].
