Interim Decision #2806 

MATTER OF CALICA 

Application for Admission as Permanent Resident Under Section 

203(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 

A-22264180 

Decided by .Regional Commissioner December 6, 1979 

(1) Applicant, a 25-year-old unmarried native and citizen of Poland was first admitted 

into the United States as a nonimmigrant visitor on July 5, 1976. On September 19, 

1978, he was granted political asylum in the United. States and the privilege of 

departing voluntarily by September 19, 1979. After two years and four months 

physical presence in the United States, lw was issued a Refugee Travel Docuuteut 

November 30, 1978, and was paroled as a refugee upon his return from Canada on 

December 23, 1978. On January 16, 1979, he requested permanent resident status under 

section 5 of the Act of October 5, 1978, Pub. L 95-412, effected in accordance with 

section 203(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, B U.O.O. 1153(g). 

(2) Though section 203(g) is not specific as to whether its two year residence requirement applies only to residence as a refugee, the legislative history of Pub. L. 95 -412 

reveals that its benefits are intended only for aliens who have been paroled as refugees 

and who have been in the United States for at least two years as refugees. 

(3) Where the record indicated that the applicant had not been in the United States for 

two years after his parole as a refugee, the applicant was not eligible for admission as 

a permanent resident under Pub. L. 95-412 and section 203(g) of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1153(g), as amended. 

ON BEHALF or PETITIONER: Melvyn E. Stein, Esquire 

One North LaSalle Street 

Chicago, Illinois 60602 

This matter is before me on certification by the District Director 

who on September 4, 1979, rejected the request for permanent resident 

status under Pub. L. 95-412 which is effected in accordance with section 

203(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1153(g), as 

amended. The decision will be affirmed. 

The applicant is a 25-year-old unmarried native and citizen of Poland. He was first admitted to the United States on July 5, 1976, as a 

nonimmigrant visitor. On September 19, 1978, he was granted political 

asylum in the United States and granted the privilege of departing 

from the United States voluntarily by September 19, 1979. The appli430 
Interim Decision #2806 

cant was issued a Refugee Travel Document on November 30, 1978. 

Upon his return from Canada on. December 23, 1978, he was "paroled as 

a refugee." On January 16, 1979, he submitted application Form 1-485 

to request permanent resident status under section 5 of the Act of 

October 5, 1978, Pub. L. 95-412. 

The District Director rejected the application for several reasons. 

One reason was that the applicant had not been in the United States 

for two years after his parole as a refugee as required by sections 

203(g) and (h). The other reasons mentioned by the District Director as 

a basis for rejecting this application have no bearing on the benefit 

that the applicant is seeking. 

On appeal, the applicant, through counsel, maintains that section 

203(g) does not specifically require that the requisite two year presence 

be after the entry as a refugee. He contends that he has been in the 

United States since July 1976, and should be entitled to the benefits of 

Pub. L. 95-412 notwithstanding that his "parole as a refugee" was only 

effected in December 1978. 

I have determined that the applicant is not eligible for this benefit 

because he has not been in the United States for two years since his 

parole as a refugee. I reached this conclusion after careful examination 

of Pub. L. 95-412 and its legislative history, section 208(g) and (h) of the 

Act, and the implementing Operations Instructions at 0.I. 235.12. 

Throughout, it is stated that the purpose of this legislation was to 

afford paroled refugees the same treatment under the law as conditional entrants receive, especially to avail them of the provision which 

allows their permanent residence, once granted, to be rolled back to 

the date of their entry as refugees. In view of this, I am confident that 

the benefits of section 5 of Pub. L. 95-412 are meant to apply to aliens 

who have been paroled as refugees and who have been in the United 

States for at least two years as refugees, notwithstanding that section 

203(g) of the Act is not totally specific as to that requirement. For this 

reason, the request for this benefit, which is properly an application 

for admission to the United States and not an adjustment of status, 

cannot be granted at this time. 

The District Director has asked me to comment on another aspect of 

this case. He questions whether a citizen of an Eastern Hemisphere 

country which is communist-dominated, such as Poland, who would be 

able to seek permanent residence as a refugee under section 203(a)(7) 

of the Act, is also permitted to avail himself of the provisions of this 

new law, Pub. L. 95-412, and seek permanent residence in accordance 

with sections 203(g) and (h) of the Act. The answer is affirmative. 

Section 5 of Pub. L. 95 7412 is available to every alien who has been 

paroled as a refugee and has been in the United States for two years 

since that parole unless the alien is eligible for a "rollback", or retroac- 
Interim Decision #2806 

tive type of permanent resident admission or adjustment under some 

other law. Therefore, the only-aliens paroled as refugees not eligible 

for Pub. L. 95-412 benefit would be conditional entrants, parolees from 

Cuba falling under the Act of November 2, 1966, Pub. L. 89 -722, and 

refugees from Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos falling under the Act of 

October 28, 1977, Pub. L. 95-145. To view all others as eligible for Pub. 

L. 95-412 consideration does not subvert the legislative intent of this 

law because it was designed as a catch-all provision to operate until 

October 1980, to accommodate all aliens who have been paroled as 

refugees for at least two years without regard to the limitations of 

seventh-preference quota number availability. Along the same line of 

reasoning, it is of no consequence that if an alien, such as this applicant, were to apply for adjustment of status under section 245 of the 

Act based on refugee classification provided by section 203(a)(7), he 

might be found ineligible under section 245(c) as one who had worked 

without Service authorization. This same alien may seek permanent 

residence under Pub. L. 95-412 without regard to this period of 

unauthorized employment, because the status is accorded through the 

operation of section 203(g), not section 245; and because Pub. L. 95-412 

states that its provisions apply to aliens who meet certain criteria, 

"notwithstanding any other provision of law," It cannot be inferred 

that section 5 of Pub. L. 95-412 should not be available to those aliens 

just because they are also' eligible -to file under section 245, but who 

have chosen not to, because they realize such application would fail. To 

follow this inference and say that should be refused any Pub. L. 95-412 

consideration due to previous unauthorized employment would be to 

read something into section 5 of Pub. L. 95-412 and into section 203(g) 

of the Act which is not there. 

In conclusion, a request for benefits under Pub. L. 95-412 is properly 

an application for admission to the United States and is effected by an 

inspection not by an adjustment of status. I find that this applicant is 

not entitled to any benefits under Pub. L. 95-412 at this time because he 

has not been in the United States for two years since his parole as a 

refugee. 

ORDER' The alien's request for admission to the United States as 

a lawful permanent resident under section 5 of Pub. L. 95-412 shall not 

be entertained at this time because he is statutorily ineligible to seek 

the benefit. 

432