Adjustment of Status Under INA §245(a)

The statutory rule under INA §245(a)

Section 245(a) establishes the basic mechanism for adjustment of status. Instead of obtaining an immigrant visa at a U.S. consulate abroad and then entering as a permanent resident, a qualifying applicant may ask USCIS to adjust the applicant's status to lawful permanent residence while the applicant is physically present in the United States.

Adjustment under §245(a) is not automatic. Congress used discretionary language: an eligible applicant's status may be adjusted. The applicant must therefore establish statutory eligibility and, in an ordinary discretionary §245(a) case, warrant a favorable exercise of discretion.

Inspected and admitted

For many adjustment applicants, the first question is whether the person's relevant entry into the United States qualifies as an inspection and admission.

Typical evidence can include:

• Electronic or paper Form I-94;
• Passport admission stamp;
• CBP travel or admission records;
• Government immigration files;
• Contemporaneous travel records; or
• Other credible evidence establishing inspection and permission to enter.

Admission does not always require a conventional visa entry

In Matter of Quilantan, 25 I&N Dec. 285 (BIA 2010), the Board of Immigration Appeals held that a procedurally regular entry after inspection can constitute an admission for purposes of INA §245(a), including circumstances in which a person was permitted through a port of entry without conventional questioning.

Establishing an admission does not necessarily establish that the applicant is admissible for permanent residence. Admission for purposes of §245(a) and immigrant admissibility under INA §212 are separate legal questions.

Inspected and paroled

Parole is not an admission. Nevertheless, Congress expressly included a person who was inspected and paroled within the ordinary language of INA §245(a).

Depending on the circumstances, proof may include:

• Form I-94 identifying parole;
• A parole authorization document;
• Passport documentation;
• CBP records;
• DHS records; or
• Other documentation establishing the statutory basis for parole.

Advance parole, humanitarian parole, parole in place, and other parole-related circumstances can involve different legal rules. They should not be treated as interchangeable merely because a government record contains the word “parole.”

Entry without inspection

A person who entered the United States without inspection ordinarily cannot satisfy the inspected-and-admitted-or-paroled requirement of INA §245(a) solely through that entry.

That does not necessarily mean adjustment of status is impossible. Another statutory provision or later immigration event may alter the analysis.

VAWA self-petitioners

INA §245(a) expressly provides special treatment for a qualifying person with an approved petition for classification as a VAWA self-petitioner.

VAWA applicants also receive important protections and exemptions elsewhere in the adjustment framework. The complete analysis should therefore examine both VAWA classification and the adjustment rules specifically applicable to VAWA cases.

See Special Adjustment Categories.

Eligible to receive an immigrant visa

Adjustment under INA §245(a) requires a valid underlying basis for immigrant classification. Form I-485 does not independently create immigrant eligibility.

Common underlying bases include:

• Immediate-relative classifications;
• Family-preference classifications;
• Employment-based immigrant classifications;
• Approved self-petitions where permitted by law;
• Special immigrant classifications; and
• Other statutory immigrant categories that permit adjustment.

An applicant must continue to satisfy the underlying immigrant classification through the point required by law. Changes involving employment, marriage, petition withdrawal, petition revocation, or another qualifying event can therefore affect a pending Form I-485.

See Employment-Based Adjustment and Family-Based Adjustment.

Admissibility for permanent residence

Even where the applicant satisfies the entry requirement and has a valid immigrant classification, INA §245(a) separately requires the applicant to be admissible to the United States for permanent residence.

Potential inadmissibility issues can include:

• Health-related grounds;
• Criminal grounds;
• Controlled-substance issues;
• Fraud or willful misrepresentation;
• False claims to U.S. citizenship;
• Unlawful presence;
• Prior removal;
• Alien smuggling;
• Security-related grounds; and
• Public-charge requirements where applicable.

Immigrant visa availability

INA §245(a) requires an immigrant visa to be immediately available as required by the statute. In numerically limited family- and employment-based categories, visa availability depends on the preference category, priority date, country of chargeability, Department of State Visa Bulletin, and applicable USCIS filing-chart rules.

Visa availability may also change after Form I-485 is filed. If a priority date retrogresses, USCIS may be unable to approve an otherwise approvable adjustment application until a visa number again becomes available.

Immediate relatives of U.S. citizens are not subject to the ordinary family-preference numerical waiting lines.

See Visa Availability for Adjustment of Status.

INA §245(c) adjustment bars

Satisfying §245(a) does not necessarily establish adjustment eligibility. Congress created separate statutory bars in INA §245(c) that can prevent adjustment for particular applicants.

Depending on the case, relevant issues may include:

• Crewman entry;
• Unauthorized employment;
• Unlawful immigration status on the date Form I-485 is filed;
• Failure to continuously maintain lawful status;
• Transit without visa;
• Visa Waiver Program admission;
• S nonimmigrant status;
• Employment-based lawful-status requirements; and
• Violation of the terms of nonimmigrant status.

Exemptions are not uniform. An applicant who is exempt from one adjustment bar is not necessarily exempt from another.

See the complete INA §245(c) Adjustment Bars Guide.

Adjustment under INA §245(a) is discretionary

INA §245(a) provides that an eligible applicant's status may be adjusted to that of a lawful permanent resident. Statutory eligibility therefore does not create an absolute entitlement to approval.

USCIS has long treated ordinary adjustment as requiring a favorable exercise of discretion. Its May 21, 2026 Policy Memorandum PM-602-0199 renewed and strengthened the agency's emphasis on that discretionary component.

Immigration history can be part of the discretionary analysis

USCIS directs adjudicators to consider relevant immigration conduct, including circumstances involving:

• Compliance with U.S. immigration laws;
• Compliance with the conditions of current or prior immigration status;
• Unauthorized employment or other immigration violations;
• Fraud, false testimony, or material inconsistencies in dealings with USCIS or another government agency;
• The circumstances surrounding applications for visas, admission, or parole;
• Conduct following admission or parole that may be inconsistent with the purpose of the admission, parole, or representations previously made to government officials;
• Failure to depart after the purpose or authorized period of a nonimmigrant admission or parole has ended; and
• The applicant's broader immigration history.

USCIS's 2026 emphasis on consular processing

PM-602-0199 states USCIS's view that adjustment of status is an exception to the ordinary immigrant visa process abroad rather than a substitute for consular processing as a general matter.

In a case where consular processing was available, USCIS may consider the circumstances under which a nonimmigrant or parolee remained in the United States and sought adjustment rather than departing for immigrant visa processing. The significance of that issue is fact-specific and should be considered together with the applicant's complete immigration history and the particular immigrant category involved.

Dual-intent classifications

USCIS expressly recognizes that applying for adjustment is not inconsistent with simultaneously maintaining a nonimmigrant classification that permits dual intent, such as H-1B or L-1.

Maintaining lawful dual-intent status, however, does not by itself require USCIS to exercise adjustment discretion favorably.

Positive and negative factors

The weight assigned to any factor depends on the particular case. USCIS's existing discretionary framework requires adjudicators to balance the favorable and unfavorable circumstances rather than deciding discretion through a single isolated fact.

Discretionary denials must explain the balancing

PM-602-0199 instructs that when USCIS denies an adjustment application based on an unfavorable exercise of discretion, the written decision must identify the positive and negative factors considered and explain why the negative factors outweigh the positive factors.

Evidence used to establish §245(a) eligibility

The necessary evidence depends on the case, but a complete adjustment record should generally address each legally distinct eligibility issue.

When primary records are genuinely unavailable, the case may require secondary evidence, government records, sworn declarations, or other credible proof. The evidence should be tailored to the particular statutory or discretionary issue being established.

Common INA §245(a) problems

Difficult adjustment cases often arise because a fact that initially appears straightforward carries a different legal consequence under the INA.

• The applicant cannot locate an old I-94.
• The applicant was waved through a port of entry.
• The applicant entered without inspection but has an old petition filed on or before April 30, 2001.
• The applicant was paroled but the legal basis for parole is unclear.
• The applicant received TPS after an earlier entry without inspection.
• The applicant worked without authorization.
• The applicant overstayed or otherwise violated nonimmigrant status.
• The applicant's conduct after entry raises a discretionary issue under current USCIS policy.
• The applicant made statements during an earlier visa or admission process that USCIS considers inconsistent with later conduct.
• The applicant changed employers while an employment-based I-485 was pending.
• The applicant's priority date retrogressed.
• USCIS alleges inadmissibility even though the applicant satisfies §245(a).
• USCIS accepts statutory eligibility but questions whether adjustment should be granted as a matter of discretion.