Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.

Immigration Law

J-1 Hardship Victory at SDNY: Teleanus v. Koumans

Teleanus v. Koumans

"Here, because the AAO failed to “articulate a satisfactory explanation” for why Mr. Teleanu’s departure would not constitute exceptional hardship for J.T., and provided no indication that it gave “explicit administrative consideration [to the] evidentiary material in the record,” the agency’s decision was arbitrary and capricious. ... Given the central importance of the nuclear family in our nation’s history, Bastidas v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv., 609 F.2d 101, 105 (3d Cir. 1979), there was a time when it was highly unusual for the Government “to refuse to waive the foreign residence requirement where the applicant has both a citizen-spouse and a citizen-child” because “failure to grant a waiver would result in harm to more individual citizens.” Chen, 546 F. Supp. at 1064. J.T., who is, after all, an American citizen, deserves a more thoughtful consideration of the impact this decision will have on him. ... For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is DENIED. Plaintiffs’ cross-motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. This case is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of this Court."

[Hats off to Tom Moseley!]