Last week, the Ninth Circuit issued a very interesting opinion on 212(h) waivers.  To me, it's interesting mostly because I think it conflicts with another recent Ninth Circuit case.  A 212(h) waiver has additional requirements (namely, that a beneficiary not be convicted of an aggravated felony and that he have been residing lawfully in the US for 7 years before the initiation of removal proceedings) for individuals previously admitted to the US as lawful permanent residents.  In Negrete-Ramirez, a 2014 Ninth Circuit decision, the court determined that the aggravated felony bar only applies to those individuals who entered the US as lawful permanent residents, not to those who adjust to lawful permanent residence after entry into the US.  I assumed, after reading Negrete-Ramirez, that the same interpretation would apply to the 7-year residency requirement.  Nevertheless, in Vargas-Cervantes, the Ninth Circuit applied the 7-year residency requirement to an individual who adjusted status after entry into the US.  

I'll be interested to see if a petition for rehearing is granted in the Vargas-Cervantes case.

The text of Vargas-Cervantes can be found here:

The text of Negrete-Ramirez can be found here: