Interim Decision #2517 

MATTER OF LD3ORD 

In Deportation Proceedings 

A-20413.943 

Decided by Board Augiist 17, 1976 

(1) The "60-day rule" agreement between irgin Islands employers and the Immigration , 

 and Naturalization Service which provides.that following termination of employment, 

an H-2 worker may have up to 60 days to obtain authorization for otheremploymentin 

the Islands or depart from the United States, has no bearing on the date to which the 

alien is authorized to remain in the United States. The date shown on the documents 

governs. 

(2) Where respondent was admitted as an 11-2 temporary worker authorized to remain 

until March 3, 1975 but became unemployed August 12, 1974 'and did not obtain 

reemployment and recertification within the 60 days grace period granted by the 

Service, she was deportable under section 241(a)(9) of the Immigration and Nationality 

Act as an alien who has failed to maintain status. Orders to show cause drawn under 

section 241(a)(2) of the Act issued Jan. 29, 1975 which charged that respondent had 

remained longer than peimitted because she had failed to depart by October 11, 1914 

were Improperly drawn because they did not state the proper charge or ground on 

which respondent's deportation was beIng•auuglit. 

CHARGE: 

• • Order: Act of 1952—Section 241(aX2) [8 U.S.C. 1251(aX2)j—Nonimmigrantremained longer than permitted, 

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Sharon L. Nolan, Esquire 

#4 Nye Gade 

St. Thonive, V. L 00801 

In a decision dated March 13, 1975 the immigration judge found the 

respondent deportable as charged and granted her the privilege of 

voluntary departure in lieu of deportation. The respondent appeals from 

that order. The appeal will be sustained. • 

The respondent, native of British West Indies and a citizen of the 

United Kingdom, entered the Virgin Islands of the United States as a 

nonimmigrant temporary worker (H-2 visa), authorized to remain until 

March 3, 1975. An order to show cause was issued on January 29, 1975 

charging the respondent with remaining beyond the authorized period 

of admission under section 241(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality 

Act. 

At issue in this case is the effect of the so-called "60 day rule." 

769 
Interim Decision #2517 

Pursuant to the agreement between employers of H-2 temporary w 

ers and the Immigration and Naturalization Service, each worker t 

porarily admitted to the Virgin Islands or permitted to remain thel 

temporarily is given a 60-day grace period within which to depart th& 

United States or to obtain authorization for new employment after his 

previously certified employment has terminated. It appears to be the 

position of the Service that an 11 -2 worker who remains 60 days beyond 

the termination of employinent without obtaining authorization for 

employment is deportable as an overstay even thcugh the period of stay 

granted the respondent at entry has not yet expired. 

It is alleged in the order to show cause that on August 12, 1974 the 

respondent's employment was terminated and that the respondent remained more than 60 days beyond that date. On the basis of these 

allegations the respondent was charged with deportability as an overstay. At the hearing the respondent admitted that her employment had 

been terminated but disputed the exact date of the termination. It is 

conceded, however, that 60 days had passed since she had left her 

employment when the order to show cause was issued. 

Once a nonimmigrant has been admitted for a fixed period, -within that 

period his stay is not unlawful unless he violates one of the conditions of 

his admission. Matter of Siffre, 14 I. & N. Dee. 444 (BIA 1973). The date 

until which the alien is authorized to stay is not affected by the agreement 

entered into between the employer and the Immigration and Naturalization Service, of which the 60-day rule is a part. 

Failure to keep authorized employment or to obtain new employment 

for which certification has been issued indicates that the alien is no 

longer pursuing the purpose for which he was admitted: A nonimmigrant temporary worker thereby becomes subject to deportation for 

failure to maintain status under section 241(a)(9) of the Act. Accord, 

Matter of Mehta, 14 I. & N. Dec. 451 (BIA 1973). Apparently the 

Service, through application of its 60-day rule, has determined that it 

will allow an 11-2 worker 60 days in which to „obtain new certification 

after his previously certified employment has terminated before it will 

consider the alien out of status. Although the 60 days had passed in this 

case, the order to show cause does not allege that the respondent failed 

to maintain status nor does it charge her with being deportable under 

section 241(a)(9) of the Act. 

Although the immigration judge's decision was entered after the 

respondent's authorized stay in the United States expired on March 3, 

1975, the order to show cause was issued on January 29, 1975, and is 

based upon the fact that the respondent failed to depart by October 11, 

1974, not by March 3, 1975. An alien is entitled to know the ground upon 

which his deportation is being sought. Matter of Siffre, supra. We 

conclude, therefore, that the charge is not sustained. 

770 
Interim Decision #2517 

If the respondent's stay is not extended by the district director, for 

the purposes of fair disposition of these proceedings, she should be given 

a reasonable period of time, to be fixed by the district director, within 

which to depart. If she does not so depart, she may become deportable 

for remaining longer than permitted, and a new order to show cause 

may then be issued. 

ORDER: The appeal is sustained and the proceedings are terminated. 

771