adjustment of status in removal proceedings attorney
You have an approved I-130, or one close to approval, and a hearing date in front of an immigration judge instead of a USCIS interview. That combination is unsettling even though it's good news. An old entry without inspection, a prior removal order, or a missed check-in years ago can feel like it's standing between you and the green card your marriage or family petition should produce. The relief you're asking for runs through a courtroom now, under 8 C.F.R. § 1245.2(a)(1)(i)-(ii), and the judge — not a USCIS officer — decides whether your case gets terminated with a green card in hand.
Yes, an immigration judge can grant adjustment of status in removal proceedings under INA § 245(a) and 8 C.F.R. § 1245.2(a)(1)(i)-(ii), provided the respondent has an approved or approvable petition, is eligible for a visa, and is not barred by unlawful entry, a prior order, or other inadmissibility unless waived.
The Hard Truth
An approved I-130 opens the door to this process, but the judge still has to grant the green card; the approval alone doesn't do it. The judge has discretion to deny adjustment even on an approved petition if there's a negative factor in the record — a prior removal order, a lapse in status, a criminal charge regardless of disposition. If you entered without inspection, USCIS treats that as a hard bar at an interview; in immigration court, the only way around it is arguing you were nonetheless 'admitted' under Matter of Quilantan, 25 I&N Dec. 285 (BIA 2010), or qualifying for 245(i) grandfathering if a petition was filed on your behalf before April 30, 2001. Neither argument wins by default. A prior removal or voluntary departure order adds another layer — it may need to be reopened or waived before adjustment is even on the table. The I-130 approval notice is just the starting signal; the real casework begins once that notice arrives.
What Happens If You Wait
Miss a master calendar hearing while your I-485 is sitting at the USCIS Lockbox instead of filed directly with the court clerk, and the judge can enter an in absentia removal order — on a case where you had a real green card path. Unlawful presence keeps accruing while the case drags, which matters later if a waiver becomes necessary. Background checks run through the USCIS National Benefits Center (NBC) expire and have to be redone, adding months. If a child on the petition is approaching 21, delay risks losing Child Status Protection Act coverage entirely. And if the underlying I-130 is challenged or revoked while your motion to terminate sits unfiled with ICE's Office of Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA), you can lose the one thing the whole case depends on.
Step-by-Step Process
First, confirm the court actually has jurisdiction over your I-485 under 8 C.F.R. § 1245.2(a)(1)(i)-(ii) — this differs depending on whether proceedings started before or after the petition was filed. Second, the I-485 package is filed directly with the Immigration Court clerk per the EOIR Immigration Court Practice Manual, Chapter 3.1(b), with proof of service on OPLA — not mailed to the USCIS Lockbox. Third, biometrics and background checks are scheduled through the USCIS National Benefits Center; at courts like Varick Street in New York, Chicago at 525 W. Van Buren, or Los Angeles at 606 S. Olive Street, this routinely adds a continuance to the docket while NBC processes the file. Fourth, if unlawful presence or a prior order is in the case, an I-601 or I-601A waiver gets filed and resolved before or alongside the adjustment application. Fifth, once the petition is approved and any waiver issue is resolved, our attorneys approach OPLA about a joint motion to terminate or administratively close the case. Sixth, if OPLA won't agree, the case proceeds to a merits hearing where the judge rules on the adjustment application directly.
A Real-World Example
Consider a composite respondent — call her R — who entered the US without inspection in 2008 and married a US citizen in 2022. Her spouse's I-130 was approved while she was already in removal proceedings at the Chicago Immigration Court. Her attorney's first move was filing the I-485 directly with the court clerk, with service on OPLA, rather than mailing it to USCIS — avoiding the trap of a pending Lockbox filing with a master calendar hearing still on the books. Because R entered without inspection, the next step was building the record for an admission argument under Matter of Quilantan, since she had no visa or inspection at entry. Biometrics were scheduled through the NBC, which added a four-month continuance to the docket. Her attorney then approached the assigned OPLA trial attorney to discuss the strength of the petition and the admission argument, laying groundwork for either a joint motion or a contested merits hearing. The case is still moving through that sequence, with each procedural step completed in order and documented for the judge.
William J. Vasquez has spent years practicing immigration law, including removal defense cases where adjustment of status is litigated in front of an immigration judge rather than processed through a USCIS interview. He handles I-485 filings inside EOIR proceedings, waiver applications tied to those filings, and motions to terminate or administratively close cases once a petition is approved. Appearances before the Board of Immigration Appeals are available nationwide to any attorney licensed in a single state bar under 8 C.F.R. § 1292.1, and our practice is built around that. For matters that would require a federal Circuit Court of Appeals petition for review, representation is limited to the circuits where our attorneys currently hold bar admission, and we are working to expand that list.
Key Terms Explained
Adjustment of Status: the process of applying for lawful permanent residence without leaving the US, governed by INA § 245(a) (8 U.S.C. § 1255(a)).
245(i) Grandfathering: an exception allowing some noncitizens with a qualifying petition filed before April 30, 2001 to adjust status despite an entry or status violation that would otherwise bar it.
EOIR: the Executive Office for Immigration Review, the Department of Justice agency that runs the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals.
OPLA: the ICE Office of Principal Legal Advisor, the attorneys who represent the government in removal proceedings.
I-601 / I-601A Waiver: applications to waive specific grounds of inadmissibility, including the 3/10-year unlawful-presence bar.
Matter of Quilantan: a 2010 BIA decision holding that a noncitizen need only show they were 'admitted' in some manner — not with a valid visa — to satisfy INA § 245(a)'s inspection requirement.
Administrative Closure / Termination: court actions that take a case off the active docket (administrative closure) or end it entirely (termination), often requested once a green card path is confirmed.
In Absentia Order: a removal order entered when a respondent fails to appear for a scheduled hearing.
National Benefits Center (NBC): the USCIS office that processes biometrics, background checks, and related steps for I-485 applications, including those pending before an immigration judge.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Can I adjust status in immigration court if I entered the US without inspection? A: It's possible, but it requires either a 245(i) grandfathered petition filed before April 30, 2001, or an admission argument under Matter of Quilantan, 25 I&N Dec. 285 (BIA 2010) — an unlawful entry alone is not automatically fatal, but it isn't automatically overcome either.
Q: What happens if the immigration judge denies my adjustment application even though my I-130 was approved? A: The judge can still order removal; your options at that point are an appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals or, in limited circumstances, a motion to reconsider or reopen based on new evidence or law.
Q: Is it better to accept a stipulated removal order or keep fighting for adjustment of status? A: A stipulated removal order gives up the case entirely and triggers bars to future reentry, while a pending adjustment application — even an uncertain one — keeps the green card path open and should only be abandoned after a full eligibility review.
Q: Do I still need to go to my biometrics appointment if my case is in immigration court? A: Yes — the USCIS National Benefits Center schedules biometrics and background checks for I-485 applications pending in EOIR proceedings the same as it would for a case filed directly with USCIS, and missing that appointment can stall the case.
Q: Will my case be terminated automatically once my I-130 is approved? A: No — termination or administrative closure has to be requested, usually through a motion to the court or a joint motion negotiated with the ICE Office of Principal Legal Advisor, and the judge still has to grant it.
Clients come to us mid-case, often after a different attorney mailed their I-485 to the Lockbox instead of filing it with the court, or after a missed hearing turned into an in absentia order. No one can promise them a result at that point. What they describe afterward is usually simpler: someone finally explained which filing goes where, what the judge is actually deciding, and what each continuance on the docket is for. That's the kind of feedback that shapes how we structure these cases from the first consultation.
If you have a petition in hand — approved or close to it — and a hearing date on the calendar, the filing sequence matters as much as the paperwork itself. The I-485 has to reach the right office at the right time; get that sequence wrong and the case stalls at a missed deadline instead of moving forward.
Schedule a consultation with our immigration team to review your petition, your entry history, and your hearing date together, and to map out the specific filings — I-485, any required waiver, and a motion to terminate or administratively close — your case needs next.
- Family-Based Immigration Petitions
- Removal Defense & Immigration Court Representation
- Provisional Unlawful Presence Waivers (I-601A)
- Appeals Before the Board of Immigration Appeals