Wright v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
| Citation | 379 F.2d 275 |
| Decision Date | 22 June 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 17265.,17265. |
| Parties | Mrs. Kuniko Haraguchi WRIGHT, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Philip M. Carden, Nashville, Tenn., for petitioner.
Paul R. Walsh, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C. (Robert M. Draper, U. S. Atty., Charles G. Heyd, Asst. U. S. Atty., Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief; Maurice A. Roberts, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., of counsel), for respondent.
Before WEICK, Chief Judge, COMBS, Circuit Judge, and CECIL, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petitioner, a native of China but a citizen of Japan, was admitted to the United States as a visitor for pleasure for a six months' period. Shortly before the expiration of that period she married an American citizen. Her husband filed a petition with the Immigration and Naturalization Service to have her classified as a nonquota immigrant. The petition was approved.
Within a period of one month petitioner filed an action for divorce in the state court and her husband then withdrew the petition which he had filed to have her classified as a nonquota immigrant. The Service revoked its approval of the petition. Petitioner was notified that she would have to depart from the United States on or before a certain date and upon her failure to leave, deportation proceedings were instituted against her.
In the deportation proceedings petitioner was represented by counsel and after hearing, the deportation order under review here was issued.
It is claimed that petitioner acquired a status when the Service approved her husband's petition to classify her as a nonquota immigrant and that she was deprived of due process of law when her husband withdrew the petition and the Service revoked its approval without notice to her and without giving her an opportunity to be heard. In our opinion this contention is without merit.
An alien does not obtain a vested right upon approval of a visa petition. Amarante v. Rosenberg, 326 F.2d 58 (9th Cir. 1964). A citizen who files a visa petition has a right to withdraw it and upon notice of withdrawal to the Service, revocation of approval is automatic. This result follows logically because it was the citizen's petition which was approved in the first place. The regulations do not provide for a hearing on either the approval or revocation of a petition. United States ex rel. Stellas v. Esperdy, 366 F.2d 266 (2nd Cir. 1966); Pacheco-Pereira v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bangura v. Hansen
...could be denied." Id. If this right exists, however, it clearly belongs to the citizen spouse and not the alien spouse. Wright v. INS, 379 F.2d 275, 276 (6th Cir.1967) (holding that an alien spouse has no protected interest in an I-130 3. Nonetheless, this Court can address Plaintiffs' fail......
-
Ali v. INS
...on their behalf is withdrawn. Similarly, an alien does not obtain a vested right upon approval of a marriage petition. Wright v. INS, 379 F.2d 275, 276 (6th Cir.1967). Thus, "a citizen who files a visa petition has a right to withdraw it and upon notice of withdrawal to the Service, revocat......
-
Abdulla v. Cuccinelli, Case No. 20-1576
...would attach to Abdulla and not his non-citizen spouse or children. See Bangura, 434 F.3d at 496 n.2 (citing Wright v. INS, 379 F.2d 275, 276 (6th Cir. 1967) (per curiam) (holding non-citizen spouse has no protected interest in an I-130 ...
-
Menezes v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
...what he deems to be good and sufficient cause."An alien does not obtain a vested right upon approval of a visa petition. Wright v. INS, 379 F.2d 275, 276 (6th Cir. 1967), Citing Amarante v. Rosenberg, 326 F.2d 58 (9th Cir. 1964). Thus, "(a) citizen who files a visa petition has a right to w......