Petição para encerramento ou encerramento administrativo: qual a diferença?

Angelica Rice • September 22, 2022

Click here to read this article in English

O sistema judiciário de imigração dos Estado Unidos está atualmente sobrecarregado com milhares de casos imigratórios que ainda precisam ser julgados. Para tentar lidar com esse volume de casos e processar os que estão atrasados, o Departamento de Segurança Interna dos Estados Unidos (DHS) e o sistema judiciário imigratório atenuaram suas regras nas petições de encerramento e no encerramento administrativo, fechando certos tipos de casos que não consideram ser casos relevantes para execução. E o quê isso significa? Qual a diferença entre a petição para encerramento e o encerramento administrativo? É algo que possa ser feito no seu caso? Continue lendo para descobrir.

Encerramento Administrativo

Encerramento administrativo é um instrumento para administração dos processos judiciais, usado para temporariamente pausar os procedimentos de deportação, estabelecido de acordo com o caso Matter of W-Y-U, 27, Lei de Imigração e Naturalização (I&N) Dez 17,18 (BIA 2017). Encerrando administrativamente um caso, temporariamente o remove do calendário processual do Juiz e o coloca “em espera” até o advogado do DHS ou do respondente fazer o pedido para ser colocado novamente no calendário processual. Para ter seu caso encerrado administrativamente, o DHS precisa concordar com o pedido.

Juízes de imigração podem encerrar casos administrativamente por várias razões, uma das mais comuns é por serem de prioridade baixa ou “um caso não relevante para execução” e o DHS não deseja julgar o caso naquele momento. Outro motivo comum para o encerramento administrativo, é quando o respondente tem outro tipo de processo pendente com a imigração (USCIS) e a decisão desse processo afetaria o caso que está sendo julgado pelo juiz. Por exemplo, uma pessoa que tenha a petição I-130 pendente com a USCIS, mas ao mesmo tempo está com um processo judicial imigratório contra ele, o juiz pode concordar em fazer o encerramento administrativo desse processo para aguardar a decisão da imigração na petição I-130. Dessa forma, nenhuma audiência será agendada no processo até o DHS ou advogado do respondente colocar o caso novamente no calendário processual. Se a petição I-130 for aprovada, o respondente pode pedir para seu caso voltar ao calendário processual e pedir para que seu processo judicial imigratório seja dispensado. Quando seu caso for encerrado administrativamente, em certas circunstâncias, você tem como aplicar para uma autorização de trabalho.

Extinção do processo

Se achar que seu caso não deveria estar no sistema judiciário de imigração, porque você já recebeu algum outro tipo de benefício imigratório ou porque o processo não foi feito de forma apropriada, ou mesmo por alguma outra razão, o respondente ou seu advogado pode fazer um pedido para que o caso seja extinto.

Extinção do processo judicial significa que você não tem mais um processo no sistema judiciário imigratório. De acordo com as regras do DHS e desse sistema judiciário(?), o DHS é encorajado a usar sua discrição para extinguir os processos que não são prioridade para execução. Não são prioridade se o requerido não for uma ameaça à segurança nacional, não tenha histórico criminal e tenha entrado nos Estados Unidos antes de novembro de 2020. Entretanto, se seu processo for extinto e você não tem outra forma de benefício imigratório ou não tem como aplicar para nenhum benefício com a USCIS, não terá como obter a autorização de trabalho e estará nos Estados Unidos sem status e sem nenhuma condição imigratória legal. Por esse motivo, os respondentes às vezes preferem não buscar a extinção do processo, continuando com o caso em andamento.

Determinar se uma dessas opções é a certa para você pode ser complicado. Você precisa consultar um advogado de imigração, que determine se o encerramento administrativo ou o encerramento da petição será o melhor para você.

Este blog não se destina a dar aconselhamento jurídico e nada aqui deve ser interpretado como estabelecimento de uma relação cliente-advogado. Por favor, agende uma consulta com um advogado de imigração, antes de agir baseado em qualquer informação lida neste blog.

This Facebook widget is no longer supported.

Angelica Rice

Motion to Terminate or Admin Close: What’s the Difference?

By Angelica Rice • August 11, 2022

The United States Immigration Court system is currently overwhelmed with hundreds of thousands of immigration cases that have yet to be adjudicated. In an effort to handle this volume of cases and clear out some of their backlogged cases, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Court, have relaxed their policies on terminating and administratively closing certain kinds of cases that they have deemed not to be enforcement priority cases. So, what does this mean? What is the difference between administratively closing a case or terminating a case? Is this something you want to pursue in your case? Keep reading to find out.

Can Undocumented Immigrants Obtain a Driver’s License in the U.S.?

By Angelica Rice • May 20, 2022

Many undocumented immigrants, or immigrants without status, wonder if they are able to get a United States driver’s license. Some states allow for this, while many states still do not, so whether or not you are able to get a driver's license without evidence of status depends on where you live. See below a brief guide to obtaining a non-immigrant driver’s license in the United States.

< Older Post

Newer Post >

UPDATE: Federal Court Postpones DHS Rule Eliminating “Duration of Status” (D/S)

By Juliana LaMendola • September 22, 2026

On September 14, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued a nationwide preliminary injunction in Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security , halting the implementation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) final rule that was scheduled to eliminate “duration of status” (D/S) on September 15, 2026. As a result of this nationwide order, DHS is blocked from enforcing fixed periods of admission for F-1 students, J-1 exchange visitors, and I media representatives while the litigation moves forward. Because the current “duration of status” framework remains in full effect, F, J, and I visa holders are not required to file Form I-539 extension of stay applications to remain in valid status beyond program end dates at this time. Furthermore, restrictions on academic transfers, constraints on enrolling in second programs at the same degree level, 240-day caps on continued employment while extensions are pending, and shortened grace periods do not apply during the injunction. F-1 nonimmigrants retain the full 60-day post-completion grace period, and J-1 holders maintain their 30-day grace period. However, please note that this preliminary injunction is not a final ruling invalidating the rule , and a status conference is scheduled for October 2, 2026, to determine next steps in the litigation. Immediate Practice Tips: Inspect I-94 Travel Records Upon Reentry: F, J, and I visa holders currently admitted under D/S retain their status and should continue to be readmitted under D/S following international travel until the injunction is lifted. However, because the I-94 record controls legal stay, travelers must inspect their CBP-issued Form I-94 immediately upon reentry to confirm the "Admit Until Date" states "D/S" rather than a specific expiration date. If a specific date is mistakenly recorded, contact a local CPB Deferred Inspection Site. Notify HR and Review Workplace Compliance: Employers sponsoring F-1 or J-1 employees should inform HR and hiring managers that the September 15 fixed-period rule is postponed and standard D/S rules govern. This development does not alter standard filing windows or Form I-9 verification procedures for post-completion OPT or STEM OPT extensions. Maintain Operational Readiness and Defer Unnecessary Filings: Visa holders and employers should defer travel or filing strategy decisions made solely in anticipation of the fixed-admission rule. Because DHS may appeal or the court could alter the timeline on short notice, institutions and visa holders should maintain readiness to adjust plans if implementation resumes. There are many evolving components to this litigation. If you are an F-1, J-1, or I visa holder, sponsoring institution, or employer, you should proactively coordinate with your international student office and legal counsel to protect your status and monitor upcoming court proceedings.

DHS Final Rule Eliminating “Duration of Status” (D/S): Practice Tips and Transition Procedures

By Juliana LaMendola • September 3, 2026

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published its final rule eliminating the longstanding "duration of status" (D/S) policy for F, J, and I visa holders, replacing it with a fixed period of admission effective September 15, 2026. This rule requires that those who need additional time to complete their programs must file Form I-539 with USCIS or travel abroad and seek to reenter to extend their authorized period of stay. F and J visa holders present in the U.S. and in valid status on September 15, 2026, will be allowed to remain in the United States until the Program End Date listed on their current Form I-20 (for F-1s) or Form DS-2019 (for J-1s), up to a maximum of four years (until September 15, 2030) plus a 60-day grace period for F-1s and a 30-day grace period for J-1s, without filing an Extension of Status request with USCIS. However, this safety net only applies while staying in the U.S.; international travel and subsequent reentry after September 15, 2026 will result in readmission under the new rule with an I-94 that expires on the Program End Date or Employment Authorization Document (EAD) expiration, but no later than four-years after their date of re-entry. Additionally, once re-admitted under the new rules, F-1s will only receive a 30-day grace period. Immediate Practice Tips: Any F-1 or J-1 nonimmigrant currently in the U.S. who plans to change programs, start a new degree level, or needs more time to complete their studies must work with their school or program sponsor to update their SEVIS record and receive an extended Form I-20 or DS-2019 before September 15, 2026. Eligible F-1 students should submit their post-completion OPT or STEM OPT work authorization applications (Form I-765) before September 15, 2026, to secure their status and drastically reduce the likelihood of needing a Form I-539 extension application. Any F-1 student who is eligible to apply for OPT or STEM OPT before March 18, 2027, should do so as soon as they are eligible to file their Form I-765. Since F-1s can file OPT applications up to 90 days in advance of graduation, F-1 students graduating before June 15,2027, should be able to file their OPT applications before March 18, 2027, and should do so to avoid also having to file Form I-539 to extend their stay. Thus, most F-1 students graduating in December 2026 and May/June 2027 should be able to take advantage of the transition rule’s delay in having to file Form I-539 applications and should only need to file Form I-765 to apply for OPT. Incoming F-1 and J-1 students who can enter the United States before the September 15, 2026 effective date (within the permissible 30-day window prior to their program start) should do so to benefit from the transition rules, including the full 60-day F-1 grace period and deferred extension requirements. Students (F-1 and J-1) who are planning international travel should return before the effective date if possible to preserve their transition benefits. There are many parts of the rule that are not discussed here. If you are currently an F-1 or J-1 visa holder, you should proactively coordinate with your institutions and international office to protect your status and stay informed.

USCIS Issues Updated Guidance on Public Charge Rules

By Kris Quadros-Ragar • August 27, 2026

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has released updated policy guidance detailing how officers will evaluate "public charge" inadmissibility for individuals applying for green cards through adjustment of status. This update follows a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) final rule that rescinds the 2022 public charge regulations. The new policy takes effect on September 18, 2026 , and applies to all green card applications (Form I-485) postmarked or submitted on or after that date. Who Is Subject to the Public Charge Rule? Most family-based and employment-based green card applicants will be subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility. This includes spouses, children, and parents of U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents, as well as most employment visa preference categories, investors, and diversity visa applicants. Certain categories remain explicitly exempt under immigration law. These include: Asylees and refugees Victims of human trafficking (T visa) or crime (U visa) Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) self-petitioners Special Immigrant Juveniles Temporary Protected Status (TPS) applicants Certain military-related applicants and other designated humanitarian groups How USCIS Will Make Determinations USCIS officers will evaluate whether an applicant is likely to become a public charge by reviewing the totality of their circumstances on a case-by-case basis. Key factors include: Five Statutory Factors: Age, health, family status, assets/financial resources, and education or skills. Affidavit of Support: Submission of Form I-864 executed by a sponsor. Use of Public Benefits: USCIS will look at means-tested public benefits, such as cash assistance for income maintenance, housing assistance, food stamps (SNAP), or college financial aid. Note on timing: For benefits received before September 18, 2026, USCIS will only consider public cash assistance for income maintenance and long-term institutionalization at government expense. For benefits received on or after September 18, 2026, the broader consideration of all listed means-tested benefits will apply. Public Charge Bonds If an officer determines that an applicant is inadmissible solely on public charge grounds, USCIS may issue a Notice of Intent to Deny that invites the applicant to post a public charge bond using Form I-945. If an invited applicant successfully posts the required cash or surety bond, USCIS may approve the application for permanent residence. Public charge bonds can only be submitted if explicitly invited by USCIS. Santos Lloyd Law Firm will continue to monitor immigration developments closely and provide updates as further implementation details are released. For more information, please access: https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/uscis-issues-guidance-on-making-public-charge-inadmissibility-determination