Matter of Coronado Acevedo: When to Terminate Removal Proceedings

Matter of Coronado-Acevedo, 28 I&N Dec. 648 (A.G. 2022), is the Attorney General decision that restored immigration judges’ authority to terminate removal proceedings when a case no longer serves a legitimate enforcement purpose, particularly when the person in proceedings has a viable path to legal status through U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. If you are in removal proceedings and have a pending family petition, U-visa, T-visa, VAWA self-petition, or another application only USCIS can approve, this is the decision that gives your immigration judge the power to end the court case rather than force it to a removal order or a grant of relief.

What the Decision Changed

Two 2018 Attorney General decisions had stripped immigration judges of most of their discretion to remove cases from the docket. Matter of Castro-Tum held that immigration judges lack general authority to administratively close cases outside the narrow situations spelled out in regulation or settlement.¹ Matter of S-O-G- & F-D-B- went further, holding that judges also had no inherent authority to terminate or dismiss proceedings for reasons beyond those expressly listed in regulations.² Together those rulings left judges with almost no way to end a case, even when the respondent was clearly eligible for a benefit only USCIS could grant.

Coronado-Acevedo overruled S-O-G- directly and restored the ability of immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals to terminate proceedings in appropriate circumstances.³ The decision recognized that immigration adjudication is spread across multiple agencies and that requiring every case to end inside the courtroom, in either a removal order or a grant of relief, was impractical and unfair. The ruling was expressly interim, meant to hold until DOJ completed a rulemaking. That rulemaking has since finished, and the standards Coronado-Acevedo announced now sit in federal regulations.

One boundary worth noting: Coronado-Acevedo is about termination, which fully resolves a case and takes it off the docket. It’s distinct from administrative closure, which only pauses a case and can be reopened by either party through a motion to recalendar.⁴

When a Judge Must Terminate

The regulations that followed Coronado-Acevedo split termination into two categories. Some situations require the judge to terminate. Others leave the decision to the judge’s discretion.

Termination is mandatory when DHS cannot sustain the charges of removability, when the respondent has become a U.S. citizen, or when both parties file a joint motion to terminate. On a joint motion, the judge must grant it unless there are “unusual, clearly identified, and supported reasons” for denying it.⁴ That is a high bar, which is why getting DHS to join or not oppose your motion is the single most important tactical goal.

When Termination Is Discretionary

When the respondent asks for termination and DHS opposes, the judge decides. Discretionary termination is available when the respondent is prima facie eligible for naturalization or immigration relief, or holds a status such as Temporary Protected Status. Prima facie eligibility means the person appears to meet the basic legal requirements on paper, not that any agency has approved anything yet. A pending family petition or crime-victim application with a plausible route to approval can meet the standard.⁴

One important limit: a judge cannot terminate for purely humanitarian reasons unless DHS expressly consents, joins the motion, or affirmatively says it does not oppose.⁴ Sympathy alone will not carry the motion. You need a concrete legal basis.

Pending USCIS Applications That Support a Motion

The most common ground for termination is a pending application with USCIS that the immigration court has no power to adjudicate.

Family-based petitions on Form I-130, where a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident spouse, parent, or adult child has filed for the respondent and the petition appears approvable.⁵
U-visa petitions on Form I-918 for victims of qualifying crimes who have helped law enforcement. A bona fide determination from USCIS brings deferred action and work authorization while the petition is pending, which strengthens the argument that the court case is unnecessary.⁶
T-visas for victims of severe human trafficking who have complied with reasonable law enforcement requests. Approval makes the respondent’s presence lawful and moots the removal case.⁷
VAWA self-petitions by spouses or children of abusive U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. S-O-G- had specifically blocked termination for people in this group, and Coronado-Acevedo restored their ability to seek termination while USCIS processes the self-petition.³

Each of these is relief only USCIS can grant. An immigration judge cannot approve a U-visa or adjudicate a VAWA self-petition. The logic of termination is straightforward in these cases. Let the agency with the proper authority do its job without a removal order hanging over the applicant.

How to Ask a Judge to Terminate

You request termination by filing a written motion with the immigration court handling your case. The motion should identify the legal basis, explain why the respondent qualifies, and attach the supporting evidence. At a minimum, that means the USCIS receipt notice for the pending application, any approval or bona fide determination letters, and documentation of prima facie eligibility for the underlying benefit.

You also serve the motion on the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, the DHS office that represents the government in immigration court.³ DHS then responds. If DHS joins the motion or says it does not oppose, you are in joint-motion territory, and the judge must grant it absent unusual reasons. If DHS opposes, you are in discretionary territory, and the strength of your record matters more.

The judge issues a written order granting or denying the request. A denial can generally be appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals, but the appeal adds months or years. Build the strongest possible record the first time.

What Termination Does and Doesn’t Give You

A granted termination removes the immediate threat of a deportation order and takes the case off the court’s docket. Hearing notices stop. You are no longer required to appear before an immigration judge in that case. What termination does not do is grant you legal status. It does not come with a green card, a work permit, or any immigration benefit on its own. You still have to pursue and win the underlying application at USCIS.

Termination is best understood as a transition. You move from defensive proceedings in court to an affirmative application process with USCIS. If the underlying application is denied, or circumstances change, the government can issue a new Notice to Appear and start a new case.

If You Had a Pending Asylum Application

If a Form I-589 asylum application was pending in immigration court when your case was terminated, USCIS has a specific process to preserve your original filing date. When USCIS confirms the I-589 was pending with EOIR at termination, it issues a new receipt notice reflecting the original filing date.⁸ That date drives the 180-day Employment Authorization Document clock, which determines when you can apply for a work permit.

If you have already refiled with USCIS and the receipt notice does not reflect the original EOIR filing date, you can send a cover letter to the asylum office asking for the correction. USCIS recommends including a stamped copy of the original I-589 and a copy of the judge’s termination order.⁸ Losing months off the EAD clock over a paperwork issue is preventable, and much harder to fix later.

Effect on ICE Detention

For someone held in ICE custody during removal proceedings, termination can lead to release. Once a termination order is final, meaning any appeal period has passed or DHS chose not to appeal, ICE’s basis for detaining the person in connection with those proceedings effectively dissolves. In practice, a final termination order often results in release, though ICE retains separate authority to detain under other provisions of immigration law. If a detained family member has a strong basis to seek termination, the urgency of filing is obvious.

The Current Climate for Termination Motions

The regulations authorizing termination remain on the books and are legally binding.⁹ What has changed is DHS practice. The current administration has rescinded prior prosecutorial discretion guidance, and DHS attorneys are far less likely to agree to termination or to indicate non-opposition. Because judges cannot grant purely humanitarian termination without DHS consent, and because joint motions are much easier to win than contested ones, expect opposition and prepare accordingly.

None of that changes the underlying rule. Judges who find the legal standards met have the authority to grant termination regardless of the political environment. A thorough evidentiary record, a clear statement of prima facie eligibility, and readiness to appeal a denial to the Board of Immigration Appeals are the practical requirements for making Coronado-Acevedo work for you today.

1
U.S. Department of Justice. Matter of Castro-Tum
2
U.S. Department of Justice. Matter of S-O-G- and F-D-B-
3
U.S. Department of Justice. Matter of Coronado Acevedo
4
eCFR. 8 CFR 1003.18 – Docket Management
5
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. I-130, Petition for Alien Relative
6
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. I-918, Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status
7
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Victims of Human Trafficking: T Nonimmigrant Status
8
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. How USCIS Processes a Form I-589 Filed After Removal Proceedings are Dismissed or Terminated
9
eCFR. 8 CFR 1239.2 – Proceedings Before the Immigration Court