
News From The Courts
Eshghan Khodagolian v. John Ashcroft
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Eshghan Khodagolian, a native and citizen of Iran, petitioned the court for a
review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which affirmed a
ruling by and immigration judge that he was subject to removal because he had
abandoned his status as a lawful permanent resident (LPR). The Ninth Circuit
ruled that as the government failed to show that Khodagolian gave up his LPR
status, Khodagolian is not subject to removal.
Khodagolian received his LPR status on July 5, 1993, along with his wife and two
children. When they first came to the U.S., Khodagolian was unsure of whether
they would stay. Because of this, they brought little with them and did not sell
all of their property in Iran.
Between July 1993 and September 1998, Khodagolian made several trips to Iran. In
September 1993, Khodagolian left the U.S. for Iran for four months in order to
sell some property and gather documents needed for the children’s schools and
other purposes in the U.S. In 1995, Khodagolian went to Iran for five to six
months to care for his dying mother and his recently orphaned nephews. In June
1997, Khodagolian went to Iran to sell the family’s house. When he arrived in
Iran, he was stopped by police and notified that he had to pay certain taxes
before he would be allowed to leave. Khodagolian was stuck in Iran until April
27, 1998, which the immigration judge conceded. However, Khodagolian did not
return to the U.S. in September 1998. He argued that he had been forced to
borrow money in order to pay the taxes and stayed in Iran until he could repay
the loan. When he attempted to reenter the U.S., INS authorities suspected that
Khodagolian was ineligible as a “returning resident” because he did not return
within the one-year period required to reenter the U.S. without a reentry
permit.
In October 2002, and immigration judge found that Khodagolian had abandoned his
LPR status and was subject to removal. Khodagolian’s last trip to Iran was the
main point in the argument that he abandoned his LPR status. Khodagolian
appealed to the BIA, which affirmed the decision of the immigration judge.
While the immigration judge found that cumulatively, all three absences were
sufficient to show abandonment, the Ninth Circuit, citing Chavez-Ramirez, 792 F.
2d at 936-37, concluded that Khodagolian’s absences, “whether viewed
cumulatively or individually…do not support a conclusion that he abandoned his
permanent resident status in the United States.” Khodagolian was present in the
U.S. for a substantial amount of time between entry in 1993 and the removal
proceedings. His absences did not demonstrate the intent or desire to give up
his LPR status because he sold off assets and put his affairs in order while he
was in Iran. Also, Khodagolian’s wife and children remained in the U.S. for
almost the entire time. In addition, the immigration judge conceded that
Khodagolian was forced to remain in Iran involuntarily for half of his third
trip.
Disclaimer: This newsletter is provided as a public service and not intended to establish an attorney client relationship. Any reliance on information contained herein is taken at your own risk.