Opinion ID: 3065366
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: continues to be a refugee within the

Text: meaning of section 1101(a)(42)(A) of this title or a spouse or child of such a refugee, 5 Petitioner premises his argument for relief under § 209 on the fact that his asylum status was never formally terminated. He asserts that section 208(c)(3) of the INA and its attendant regulations require formal termination of asylum status prior to removal. Section 208(c)(3), however, simply provides that asylum may be terminated under specific circumstances and says nothing about formal termination proceedings. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(c)(3). Further, in the analogous context of refugees who have obtained LPR status, we have held that formal termination of refugee status is not a precondition to removal. Kaganovich v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 894, 897 (9th Cir. 2006) (noting that “regardless of whether a refugee loses refugee status upon adjusting status to lawful permanent resident . . . the refugee may be removed”) (citing In re Smriko, 23 I & N Dec. 836, 842 (BIA 2005)); see also Stolaj v. Holder, 577 F.3d 651, 657 (6th Cir. 2009) (holding that formal termination of asylum status was not a precondition to removing a lawful permanent resident). 798 ROBLETO-PASTORA v. HOLDER