## United States Court of App eals

F O R T H E E I G H T H C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 0- 23 10

__ __ __ __ __ _

Iren e Ney pe s B ird so ng , *

*

Pet it io ne r, *

* Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w of

v. * an Orde r of th e Bo ard

* of Im m ig rat io n Ap pe al s. Eric H. Hold er, J r., Att or ne y Gene ral *
of th e Uni te d S ta te s, *

*

Res po nd en t. *

__ __ __ __ __ _

Su bm it te d: Marc h 1 5, 2 01 1
Fi le d: Ju ne 13 , 20 11

__ __ __ __ __ _

Befo re LOKEN and COLLOTON, Cir cu it Ju dg es , and NELSON, Dis tri ct Ju dg e. *

__ __ __ __ __ _

LOKEN, Ci rcu it Ju dg e.

Iren e Bi rd so ng , a ci ti zen of th e Ph il ip pi ne s, was ad m it te d in to th e Uni te d St at es

in Decem be r 20 01 un de r a “ K-1 ” no ni m m ig ran t vi sa , a vi sa gr an te d to an al ie n so le ly

“ to co nc lu de a va li d m arri ag e wit h [th e al ie n’s U.S. c it iz en fia nc é(e) ] wit hi n n in et y
da y s aft er ad m is si on .” 8 U.S.C. § 11 01 (a)( 15 )(K)(i ). A K-1 vi sa m ay on ly be is su ed

aft er ap p ro va l of a pe ti ti on by th e al ie n’s fia nc é(e)

. See 8 U.S.C. § 11 84 (d ). Ms

. Bi rd so ng rem ai ne d in th is co un try bu t di d no t m arry th e U.S. ci ti zen who pe ti ti on ed

The Hon or ab l e Su sa n Ri ch ard Nels on , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e *

Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta , si tt in g b y de si gn at io n.on he r be ha lf. In Apr il 20 03

, sh e m arri ed an ot he r U.S. ci ti zen , he r cu rren t hu sb an d,

who fil ed an I-1 30 Pet it io n fo r Ali en Rel at iv e on he r be ha l f

. Th e Pet it io n was

ap pr ov ed in Octo be r 20 04

. Ms

. Bi rd so ng th en fil ed an I-4 85 App li cat io n to Reg is te r

Perm an en t Res id en ce or Adju st St at us

. The App l i c a t i o n was de ni ed

, an d th e Dep art m en t o f Hom el an d S ecu rit y co m m en ced rem ov al pro ceed in gs on th e g ro un d

th at M s

. B i r d s o n g fai le d to co m pl y wit h th e te rm s of he r K-1 vi sa

. Sh e co nc ed ed

rem ov ab il it y , se e 8 U.S.C. § 12 27 (a)( 1) (B), an d req ue st ed ad jus tm en t of st at us un de r 8 U.S.C. § 12 55 (i) ba se d o n a go od fai th m arri ag e to he r cu rren t h us ba nd

.

A f t e r rece iv in g br ie fs fro m th e pa rti es , th e Im m ig rat io n Ju dg e (IJ ) en te red a

fin al or de r of rem ov al

, co nc lu di ng th at Ms

. Bi rd so ng is ba rred fro m se ek in g
ad jus tm en t of st at us un de r 8 U.S.C. § 12 55 by su bs ect io n (d ). The Bo ard o f 1

Im m ig rat io n App eal s (BIA) affi rm ed

. Ms

. Bi rd so ng pe ti ti on s fo r jud ic ia l rev ie w of

th is fin al ag en cy act io n. See 8 U.S.C. § 12 52 (a)( 1)

. W e ha ve juri sd ic ti on to rev ie w

qu es ti on s of st at ut or y in te rp ret at io n. 8 U.S.C. § 12 52 (a)( 2) (B)( i), (D). The ag en cy ’s

gr an t of vo lu nt ary de pa rtu re di d no t de pr iv e us of ju r i s d i c t i on ov er th e BIA’s

al te rn at iv e fin al or de r of rem ov al

. Fo ti v. INS, 37 5 U.S. 21 7

, 2 19 n.1 (1 96 3)

. W e

co nc lu de th at th e BIA’s de ci si on was co ns is te nt wit h ag en cy reg ul at io ns th at

reas on ab ly in te rp ret th e rel ev an t sta tu te s and th eref or e de ny th e pe ti ti on fo r rev ie w.

I.

Thi s ap pe al rai se s an is su e of st at ut or y co ns tru ct io n -- de te rm in in g th e pr op er
rel at io ns hi p bet ween 8 U.S.C. § § 1 25 5( d) an d (i ). Sect io n 12 55 is a le ng th y st at ut e

pr es cri bi ng th e te rm s up on whi ch va rio us cl as se s of al ie ns m ay ad jus t th ei r st at us to

th at of la wfu l pe rm an en t res id en ts of th is co un try. To fram e th e is su e be fo re us , we

qu ot e th e rel ev an t p ro vi si on s o f §1 25 5:

§ 12 55 is co m

m on ly referre d t o a s § 24 5 o f th e Im m ig rat io n and Nati on al it y 1

Act. We will us e th e m or e wid el y av ai la bl e U.S. Co de cit at io ns in th is op in io n.

-2

-(a ) The st at us of an al ie n who was in sp ect ed an d ad m i t t e d or

pa ro le d in to th e Uni te d St at es

. . . m ay be ad jus t e d b y t he Att or ne y Gen eral , in hi s d is cret io n . . . if [s he m eet s cr it eri a n ot he re at is su e].

( c )

. . . [S]ub se ct io n (a) of th is se ct io n sh al l no t be ap pl ic ab le to

. . . (8 ) an y al ie n

. . . w h o h a s ot he rwis e vi ol at ed th e te rm s of a

no ni m m ig ran t v is a.

(d)

. . . The Att or ne y Gen eral m ay no t ad jus t, un de r su bs ect io n (a)
of th is se ct io n, th e st at us of a no ni m m ig ran t a l i en de sc rib ed in se ct io n 11 01 (a)( 15 )(K) of thi s tit le ex cep t to th at of an ali en la wfu ll y ad m it te d

to th e Uni te d St at es on a co nd it io na l ba si s

. . . as a res ul t of th e m arri ag e of th e no ni m

m ig ran t

. . . t o th e ci ti zen who fil ed t h e p e t i t io n to acco rd
th at ali en ’s no ni m

m ig ran t s ta tu s u nd er s ect io n 1 10 1( a)(1 5) (K) . . . .

(i) (1 ) Not wit hs ta nd in g th e pr ov is io ns of su bs ect i o n s (a) an d (c)
of th is se ct io n, an al ie n ph y si cal ly pr es en t in th e Uni te d St at es [wh o

m eet s cri te ria no t he re at is su e] m ay ap pl y to t h e Att or ne y Gen eral fo r th e ad jus tm en t o f hi s o r he r st at us to th at of an ali en lawf ul ly adm it te d
fo r pe rm an en t re si de nc e. 2

By it s pl ai n tex t, § 12 55 (d ) ap pe ars to ba r an al ie n su ch as Ms

. Bi rd so ng who

was ad m it te d un de r a K-1 no ni m m ig ran t vi sa fro m a d

ju s t i ng st at us un de r § 12 55

be cau se sh e di d no t mar r y h er pe ti ti on in g fia nc é. The fir st two ci rcu it s to co ns id er

th is is su e lo ok ed no fu rth er, con cl ud in g th at

, “ [o ]n it s face, sub se ct io n (d) pro hi bi ts

an al ie n who arri ve d on th e K-1 fia nc é[e] vi sa fro m ad jus ti ng [h er] st at us on an y ba si s
wha te ve r sa ve fo r th e m arri ag e to th e K-1 vi sa sp on so r,” an d th at “ su bs ect io n (i) do es

no t affo rd an y rel ie f fro m th e pr ov is io ns of su bs ect io n (d ).” Mar ko vs ki v. Gon zal es , 48 6 F .3d 10 8, 1 10 (4 th Ci r. 20 07 ); acco rd Kala l v . Gon zal es , 40 2 F .3d 94 8, 9 51 -5 2
(9 th Cir . 20 05 ).

Tho ug h am en dm en ts to § 12 55 (i) ha ve li m it ed th e gr ou p of al ie ns who are 2

el ig ib le fo r th is rel ie f, se e 8 U.S.C. § 1 2 5 5 (i) (B)- (C); 8 C.F.R. § 12 45 .10

, Ms

. Bi rd so ng ’s eli gi bi li ty is n ot at i ss ue

.

-3

-Ms

. Bi rd so ng arg ue s, ho wev er, th at § 12 55 (d ) by it s te rm s on ly ba rs ad jus tm en t

u n d e r § 12 55 (a), whe reas § 12 55 (i) crea te s a free st an di ng ba si s by whi ch a K- 1

n o n im m ig ran t vi sa ho ld er m ay pu rs ue ad jus tm en t of st at us un de r § 12 55

. B e c a u s e

fai lu re to m arry th e pe ti ti on in g K-1 fia nc é pu t he r in a cl as s of al ie ns de sc rib ed in
§ 1 25 5( c)(8 ), th e arg um en t co nt in ue s, Ms

. Bi rd so ng is el ig ib le fo r ad jus tme n t o f

st at us by th e pl ai n la ng ua ge of § 12 55 (i)

, an d we m us t rem an d fo r a de te rm in at io n of

whe th er th e Att or ne y Gen eral wil l gr an t th is di sc ret io na ry rel ie f. Bec au se th e Fo ur th

Ci rcu it an d th e Nin th Ci rcu it erre d in ig no rin g th e p la in lan gu ag e o f § 1 25 5( i), M s.

Bi rd so ng wou ld ha ve us reject th ei r read in g o f § 1 25 5( d)

.

W e are th us co nf

ronte d wit h co nf

li ct in g pl ai n- la ng ua ge in te rp ret at io ns of th es e

two st at ut es

. The Ten th Ci rcu it co nf ro nt ed th e sa m e co nf

li ct in Zha ng v. Hol de r, 37 5

F. App ’x 8 79 , 88 4- 86 (10 th Cir . 20 10 ) (u np ub li sh ed ), cert . d en ie d, 13 1 S. Ct . 1 46 8
(2 01 1)

. Afte r care fu ll y su rv ey in g th e de ci si on s in Kala l a n d Mar ko vs ki an d th e

co nt rary in te rp ret at io n of § 12 55 (i) ur ge d by Ms

. Bi rd so ng in th is cas e, th e co ur t was

“ un ab le to co nc lu de th at th e st at ut or y la ng ua ge is cl ear an d un am bi gu ou s wit h res pe ct

to whet he r a K -1 vi sa ho ld er is rest ric te d from ob ta in in g adju st m en t of sta tu s u nd er § 12 55 ex cep t as pr ov id ed in su bs ect io n (d ).” Id

. at 88 5

. A p p l yi n g th e Su pr em e

Co ur t’s de ci si on in Ch ev ro n U.S.A., In c. v. Natu ral Res

. Def. Co un ci l, In c., 46 7 U.S.

83 7, 84 2- 43 (1 98 4)

, th e co ur t reject ed bo th pl ai n- la ng ua ge ap pr oa ch es an d up he ld th e
de ni al of ad

jus tm en t of st at us un de r § 12 55 (i) be cau se th e Att or ne y Gen eral ’s

reg ul at io ns th at “ pe rm it a K-1 vi sa ho ld er to ap pl y fo r ad jus tm en t of st at us on ly ba se d

up on m arri ag e to th e pe ti ti on in g Uni te d St at es ci ti zen fia nc é(e) ” are reas on ab le an d

a p erm is si bl e co ns tru ct io n o f th e st at ut e. Zhan g, 3 75 F. App ’x at 8 85

.

On ap pe al

, ig no rin g th e de ci si on in Zha ng al to ge th er, Ms

. Bi rd so ng co nc ed es

th at sh e is in el ig ib le fo r ad jus tm en t of st at us un de r 8 C.F.R. § 12 45 .1(c )(6 ) bu t arg ue s

th at § 12 55 (i) is “ cl ear on it s fa c e ” a n d a r e gu la ti on m ay no t co nt rad ic t th e pl ai n

la ng ua ge of th e st at ut e. W e ag ree with th e ge ne ral pr op os it io n bu t di sa gr ee th at th e pl ai n lan gu ag e of § 12 55 (i) an swe rs th e qu es ti on be fo re us

. In co ns id eri ng whe th er

-4

-a st at ut e is cl ear an d un am bi gu ou s un de r Ch ev ro n, th e qu es ti on is whe th er § 12 55 (i)

“ sp eak [s ] wit h th e pr eci si on ne ces sa ry to sa y de fin it iv el y whe th er it ap pl ie s” to Ms

. Bi rd so ng ’s ap pl ic at io n fo r ad jus tm en t of st at us

. Uni te d St at es v. Euro di f S.A., 12 9

S. Ct

. 87 8, 88 8 (2 00 9)

. “ [I]f th e st a t u t e i s s i l e nt or am bi gu ou s wit h res pe ct to th e

sp eci fic is su e, th e qu es ti on fo r th e co ur t is whe th er the ag en cy ’s an swe r is ba se d on

a pe rm is si bl e co ns tru ct io n of th e st at ut e.” Ch ev ro n, 46 7 U.S. at 84 3. The Co ur t ha s

al so no te d “ th at jud ic ia l de fere nc e to th e Exe cu ti ve Bran ch is es pe ci al ly ap pr op ria te

in th e im m ig rat io n co nt ex t” be cau se of it s im pa ct on fo rei g n r e l at io ns

. INS v. Agu irr e-Ag ui rre, 5 26 U.S. 41 5, 4 25 (19 99 ); s ee 8 U.S.C. §§ 11 03 (a)( 1) , 11 84 (a).

W e fi nd it he lp fu l t o v ie w th e p la in -la ng ua ge is su e in hi st or ic al pe rs pe ct iv e.

Su bs ect io n 12 55 (d ) was e n a c t e d as pa rt of th e Im m ig rat io n Mar ria ge Frau d

Am en dm en ts of 19 86

, Pu b. L. No. 99 -6 39

, § 2( e), 10 0 S t a t

. 3 5 3 7

. Tha t st at ut e
el im in at ed th e st ream li ne d, ne arl y au to m at ic ad jus tm en t-o f-s ta tu s pr oc ed ur e fo r K-1

vi sa ho ld ers un de r 8 U.S.C. § 11 84 (d ). In st ead

, to co m ba t m arri ag e frau d, Co ng res s

“ in co rp or at ed th e al ie n fia nc é(e) ’s ad jus tm en t of st at us i n t o t h e st at ut or y sc he m e”

un de r § 12 55

. Ses ay , 25 I. & N. Dec. 43 1, 43 7 (2 01 1)

. Und er § 12 55 (d ), un li ke th e

pr io r reg im e, th e K-1 vi sa ho ld er must es ta bl is h th at sh e de se rv es a di sc ret io na ry

gr an t of ad

jus tm en t of st at us by th e Att or ne y Gen eral un de r § 12 55 (a )

, “ca n on ly

a d ju s t on th e ba si s of th e m arri ag e to th e fia nc é(e) pe ti ti on er,” m us t m arry th e

pe ti ti on er wit hi n 90 da y s of arri va l, an d m us t es ta bl is h th e m arri ag e is bo na fid e
du rin g a two -y ear c on di ti on al ad jus tm en t p eri od . Id. at 44 2.

Su bs ect io n 12 55 (i)

, on th e ot he r ha nd

, was ad de d to th e st at ut e in 19 94 as pa rt

of an an nu al D e p a r t m en t of St at e ap pr op ria ti on s bi ll

. As ex pl ai ne d by th e Dep art m en t o f Ju st ic e in pro m ul ga ti ng a co nt em

po ran eo us in te rim reg ul at io n:

The req ui rem en ts of [8 U.S.C. §§ 12 55 (a) an d (c)] we re es ta bl i sh ed to di sc ou rag e in te nd in g im m ig ra n t s f r om m ov in g to th e Uni te d St at es be fo re be co m in g fu ll y el ig ib le fo r pe rm an en t res id en ce an d bypas si ng

-5

-th e or de rly im m ig ran t vi sa is su an ce pr oc es s ab road

. The se req ui rem en ts

ha ve cau se d m an y pe rs on s who are in th e Uni te d St at es to be un ab le to ad jus t st at us in th is co un try.

. . . By vi rtu e of th e req u i r e men t s o f [8
U.S.C. §§ 12 55 (a) an d (c)], th es e pe rs on s were pu ta ti ve ly req ui red to le av e th e Uni te d St at es an d Uni te d St at es co ns u l s a b r oa d ha ve be en bu rd en ed wit h im mi g r a n t vi sa is su an ce th at wou ld no t ot he rwis e ha ve be en ne ces sa ry

.

. . . [Su bs ect io n 12 55 (i) ] te m po rari ly li fts m an y of th e res tri ct io ns o n ad jus tm en t of s t a tu s un de r se ct io n [1 25 5] on ap pl ic at io ns fil ed on or aft er Octo be r 1, 19 94

, al th ou gh it do es no t affe ct pe rs o n s a d ju s ti ng

un de r ot he r se ct io ns of t he law. . . .

* * * * *

[Su bs ect io n 12 55 (i) ] al so do es no t waiv e se ve ral o th er gr ou nd s of
in el ig ib il it y fo r ad

ju s t men t of st at us un de r [s ect io n 12 55 ].

. . . An

ap pl ic an t who was adm it te d to th e Uni te d Stat es as a K-1 fia nc é(e) bu t di d no t m arry th e Uni te d St at es ci ti zen who fil ed th e pe ti ti on

. . . is al so ba rred fro m

ad jus ti ng st at us un de r [s ect io n 1 25 5].

Adju st men t o f St at us to Tha t of Pers on Adm it te d fo r Perm an en t Res id en ce;

Tem po rary Rem ov al of Cert ai n Res tri ct i o n s of Eli gi bi li ty, 59 Fed

. Reg

. 51 09 1,

51 09 2- 93

, 19 94 W L 54 33 34 (Oct . 7, 1 99 4) (em ph as is ad de d) . Con si st en t wi th th is

ex pl an at io n, th e in te rim ru le m od ifi ed 8 C.F.R. § 24 5.1 (c)( 6) to pr ov id e, as th e fin al

reg ul at io ns no w pro vi de :

(c) In el ig ib le al ie ns

. The fo ll owi ng cat eg or ie s of al ie ns are in el ig ib le to

ap pl y fo r ad

jus tm en t of st at us to th at of la wfu l pe rm an en t res id en t al ie n

un de r [8 U.S.C. § 1 25 5]:

* * * * *

(6 ) Any ali en ad m it te d t o t he Uni te d S ta te s as a no ni m m ig ran t d efi ne d
in sec ti on [11 01 (a)( 15 )(K)], un le ss :

-6

-(i) In th e cas e of a K

- 1 [fi an cé(e )]

. . . th e al ie n is ap pl y in g fo r

ad jus t men t o f st at us ba se d up on th e m arri ag e of th e K-1 [fi an cé(e )]
whi ch wa s c o n t r a ct ed wit hi n 90 da y s of en try wit h th e Uni te d St at es ci ti zen who fil ed a pe ti ti on on be ha lf o f th e K-1 [fi an cé(e )].

8 C .F.R. §§ 24 5.1 (c)( 6) (i) , 12 45 .1(c )(6 )(i ).

Thi s ch ro no lo gi cal pe rs pe ct iv e, pl us th e fact th a t § 12 55 (a) is th e le ad an d

do m in an t su bs ect io n an d § 12 55 (i) was la te r ad de d fo r a li m it ed pu rp os e, su pp or t th e

co nc lu si on of th e Nin th Ci rcu it an d th e Fo ur th Ci rcu it th at § 12 55 (d ) pl ai nl y ba rs Ms

. Bi rd so ng fro m ad

jus ti ng he r st at us

. Tho ug h Ms

. Bi rd so ng arg ua bl y co m es wit hi n th e

pu rv ie w of § 12 55 ( i ) b e c a us e sh e fal ls wit hi n th e cat ch al l cl as s of al ie ns who ha ve

“ ot he rwis e vi ol at ed th e te rm s of a no ni m m ig ran t vi sa ,” § 12 55 ( c ) (8 ), sh e fal ls

sq ua rel y wit hi n th e far m or e sp eci fic li m it at io n in § 12 55 (d ). “ [A] ba si c pr in ci pl e of

st at ut or y co ns tru ct io n [is ] th at a sp eci fic st at ut e

. . . co nt ro ls ov er a ge ne ral pr ov is io n

. . . pa rti cu l arl y whe n th e two are in te rrel at ed an d cl os el y po si ti on ed .” HCSCLau nd ry v. Uni te d St at es , 45 0 U.S. 1, 6 (1 98 1)

. Non et he le ss , it wou ld ha ve be en eas y
fo r Co ng res s i n 1 99 4 t o re so lv e al l do ub t by ad di ng a cro ss -ref eren ce t o s ub se ct io n (i) in su bs ect io n (d ), or , co nv ers el y , by ad di ng a cro ss refe ren ce to su bs ect io n (d) in

su b s ect io n (i) ha d it in te nd ed to m ak e Ms

. Bi rd so ng el ig ib le fo r § 12 55 (i) rel ie f

wit ho ut reg ard to § 12 55 (d ). Bu t Co ng res s ad de d ne it he r cl ari fic at io n. In st ead

, it was
si le nt on th e pr eci se qu es ti on be fo re u s

. I n t h e se ci rcu m st an ces , we are in cl in ed to

ag ree wit h th e Ten th Ci rcu it th at th e two su bs ect io ns are am bi gu ou s fo r pu rp os es of

th e fi rs t p art of t he Ch ev ro n a na lysis

.

Turn in g th eref

or e to th e se co nd pa rt of th e Ch ev ro n an al y si s, we ag ree wit h th e

Ten th Ci rc ui t th at 8 C.F.R. §§ 24 5.1 (c)( 6) (i) an d 12 45 .1(c )(6 )(i ) are a pe rm is si bl e

co ns tru ct io n of § 12 55 th at is en ti tl ed to Ch ev ro n de fere nc e. The se pr ov is io ns , whi ch

ba r Ms

. Bi r d s o n g a s a K-1 vi sa ho ld er fro m ad jus ti ng he r st at us on an y ba si s ot he r

th an he r m arri ag e to th e U.S. ci ti zen who pe ti ti on ed on he r be ha lf, are co ns is te nt wit h

-7

-th e “ care fu ll y craf te d sc he m e th at Co ng res s crea te d fo r th e pu rp os e of av oi di ng

m arri ag e frau d.” Kala l, 40 2 F.3 d at 95 2. Of co ur se , Co ng res s co ul d ha ve pe rm it te d

so m e K-1 vi sa ho ld ers to av oi d it s an ti frau d res tri ct io ns by ad jus ti ng th ei r s t a t us

un de r § 1 2 5 5 (i) aft er en try, bu t th e Att or ne y Gen eral reas on ab ly co nc lu de d th at
§ 1 25 5( i) d id no t re fle ct an in te nt to do so

.

II

.

Ms

. Bi rd so ng fu rth e r a rg ue s th at th e IJ vi ol at ed he r rig ht to du e pr oc es s by

fai li ng to ho ld a h eari ng on th e m eri ts of he r di sc ret io na ry ad jus tm en t-o f-s ta tu s

ap pl ic at io n. Thi s co nt en ti on is wit ho ut m eri t. Afte r gi vi ng co un se l fo r Ms

. Bi rd so ng

am pl e op po rtu ni ty to br ie f th is is su e o f s t a t u t o r y co ns tru ct io n, th e IJ an d th e BIA

de te rm in ed

, co rrec tl y in ou r vi ew, th at sh e ha d co nc e d e d r em ov ab il it y an d was

in el ig ib le fo r ad

jus tm en t of st at us as a m at te r of la w. No fu rth er he ari ng was ne ed ed

. Had we rev ers ed th e BIA’s de te rm in at io n of ine li gi bi li ty, we wou ld ha ve rem an de d

fo r wha te ve r he ari ng on th e di sc ret io na ry ad jus tm ent- of-s ta tu s is su es m ig ht th en ha ve
be en ap pr op ria te

.

W e d en y th e p et it io n fo r rev ie w.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-8

-