TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Dr. Luke Wei-Ming Chang and Dr. Amparo Belen Chang v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service

Dr. Luke WEI-MING CHANG and Dr. Amparo Helen Chang, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent

Luke Wei-Ming Chang & Dr. Amparo Belen Chang v. United States Immigration & Naturalization Serv., 418 F.2d 1334 (9th Cir. 1969)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
December 4, 1969
Docket
No. 24242_1
Judges
Merrill, Wright, Kil-Kenny
Citations
418 F.2d 13341969 U.S. App. LEXIS 9824

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Petitioners, husband and wife, are aliens who ask for review of a deportation order of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Such orders are reviewable by this court under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a.

Petitioners were admitted as nonimmigrant exchange visitors to pursue medical studies, which have now been completed. Both are licensed to practice medicine in California.

Under 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (e), aliens such as these petitioners are not eligible for immigrant visas or for permanent residency in the United States, unless they have returned for a two-year stay in their home countries. Petitioner husband requested a waiver of this requirement, asserting exceptional hardship on his wife and two children.

The application for waiver was denied by the Immigration and Naturalization Service. The Immigration and Naturalization Service thereupon commenced deportation proceedings against both petitioners. Assuming without deciding that petitioners may question in a deportation proceeding the denial of a waiver in a separate proceeding, we find that the waiver was properly denied. Petitioners made out no case of “exceptional hardship” sufficient to overcome the strong congressional policy underlying the residency requirement. Mendez v. Major, 340 F.2d 128 (8th Cir. 1965); Talavera v. Pederson, 334 F.2d 52 (6th Cir. 1964).

The petition for review is dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1982: 119822026peak 1982 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Majid Ghorbani v. Immigration and Naturalization Service686 F.2d 784 (9th Cir. 1982)

Most recent

  1. Majid Ghorbani v. Immigration and Naturalization Service686 F.2d 784 (9th Cir. 1982)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Mendez v. H. I. Major, Dist. Dir. of the Immigration & Naturalization Serv., 340 F.2d 128 (8th Cir. 1965) 47
Talavera v. Pederson, 334 F.2d 52 (6th Cir. 1964) 23

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list