Multiple Entries and the Last Lawful Admission for Adjustment of Status

“Last entry” and “last lawful admission” are not universal terms

Immigration law does not use one single entry for every purpose.

The relevant event depends on the statute being applied.

Multiple entries under INA §245(a)

INA §245(a) generally requires inspection and admission or parole.

Where the applicant has multiple entries, the complete history matters because a later departure and return may introduce:

• A qualifying admission;
• Qualifying parole;
• Entry without inspection;
• A new inadmissibility problem;
• A prior-removal issue;
• A different adjustment jurisdiction posture; or
• A changed status history.

The last lawful admission rule under INA §245(k)

INA §245(k) provides a limited exemption from specified adjustment bars for qualifying employment-based applicants.

USCIS examines whether, since the applicant's last lawful admission, the applicant has for an aggregate period of more than 180 days:

• Failed to maintain continuously lawful status;
• Engaged in unauthorized employment; or
• Otherwise violated the terms and conditions of admission.

See INA §245(k).

Example: later lawful admission and §245(k)

Advance parole generally does not restart the §245(k) clock

A person returning under ordinary advance parole is generally paroled rather than admitted.

Because §245(k) focuses on the last lawful admission, ordinary parole does not generally establish a new lawful-admission measuring point.

Advance-parole travel also now requires separate unlawful-presence analysis under Matter of Delcarmen-Lara.

See Advance Parole and Adjustment of Status.

TPS-authorized travel can involve a special admission rule

TPS travel requires separate treatment from ordinary advance parole.

USCIS policy implementing the Miscellaneous and Technical Immigration and Naturalization Amendments of 1991 provides that certain TPS beneficiaries who travel temporarily with DHS authorization and return in accordance with that authorization are inspected and admitted into TPS.

USCIS states that such qualifying admission can count as inspection and admission for INA §245(a) and §245(k).

A later visa admission can change the analysis

A person may leave the United States and later return through a qualifying nonimmigrant admission.

Examples include:

• H-1B admission;
• L-1 admission;
• F-1 admission;
• B-1/B-2 admission;
• O-1 admission; or
• Another lawful nonimmigrant admission.

The later admission can become highly important to §245(k), but the circumstances surrounding the return must also be examined for:

• Visa validity;
• Prior unlawful presence;
• Prior status violations;
• Representations at the visa interview;
• Representations at the port of entry;
• Immigrant intent rules; and
• Potential inadmissibility.

A later entry without inspection can create a new problem

Suppose a person originally entered lawfully, later departed, and then returned without inspection.

The earlier admission remains part of the historical record, but the later EWI can materially affect:

• Current §245(a) analysis;
• INA §212(a)(9)(C);
• Reinstatement of removal;
• Adjustment jurisdiction;
• Unlawful-presence consequences; and
• Eligibility for other immigration benefits.

See Entry Without Inspection and Adjustment of Status.

Multiple entries and unlawful presence

A later lawful admission does not automatically erase an unlawful-presence bar triggered by an earlier departure.

The sequence must be reconstructed:

1. When did unlawful presence begin?
2. How much accrued?
3. Did a statutory exception apply?
4. When did the applicant depart?
5. Did departure trigger INA §212(a)(9)(B)?
6. Was a waiver required or obtained?
7. How did the person return?

Multiple entries after a prior removal

When a prior removal, deportation, exclusion, expedited-removal, or voluntary-departure history exists, every later return should be analyzed carefully.

Potential provisions include:

• INA §212(a)(9)(A);
• INA §212(a)(9)(C);
• INA §241(a)(5) reinstatement;
• Form I-212 permission to reapply;
• Any waiver or consent obtained before return; and
• Whether the later admission was legally obtained.

Multiple entries and status violations

A later lawful admission can affect which violations are counted under §245(k), but it does not make the earlier violations disappear from the immigration record.

Those earlier events may remain relevant to:

• Visa eligibility;
• Unlawful presence;
• Misrepresentation;
• Removal history;
• Current USCIS discretion; and
• Credibility.

Representations made during later admissions

A later visa application or port-of-entry inspection can require disclosure of prior immigration history.

The adjustment file should therefore compare:

• DS-160 or DS-260 answers;
• Visa interview representations;
• CBP statements;
• I-94 records;
• Prior Form I-485 filings;
• Employment records;
• School records; and
• Any prior removal or status violation.

Proving the sequence of entries

Multiple-entry cases should be documented chronologically.

Useful evidence includes:

• Every available I-94;
• CBP travel history;
• Current and expired passports;
• Visas;
• Admission stamps;
• Advance parole documents;
• TPS travel documents;
• Airline records;
• USCIS approval notices;
• Prior applications and petitions;
• EOIR records; and
• Removal or border records.

See Missing I-94 and Proving Admission.

Build one master immigration timeline

For each period, identify:

Multiple entries under current adjustment-discretion policy

Current USCIS policy permits consideration of relevant immigration history when adjudicating discretionary adjustment applications.

Multiple entries may therefore matter not only to statutory eligibility but also to:

• Compliance with prior immigration classifications;
• Representations made to obtain visas;
• Representations made at inspection;
• Prior overstays;
• Unauthorized employment;
• Departures after violations;
• Family and humanitarian circumstances; and
• The totality of positive and negative factors.

Frequently asked questions