People v. Steans

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that Wang’s sister could not be converted because when she aged out, no Family Preference Category existed for nieces of United States citizens
• noting that “the drive for the legislation was the then-extensive administrative delays in the processing of visa petitions”
• finding that Wang’s sister could not retain the 1992 Priority Date because the 1992 Petition was filed by her uncle, while the 2006 Petition was filed by her father
• counsel represented plaintiffs and addressed for that court whether proceedings should be stayed pending the disposition in Costelo
• “[T]he concept of ‘retention’ of priority dates has always been limited to visa petitions filed by the same family member.”
• subsection (h)(3) “does not expressly state which petitions qualify for automatic conversion and retention of priority dates”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).