Matter of L-S-M-

May 13, 2016 PM-602-0133 Policy Memorandum SUBJECT: Matter of L-S-M-, Adopted Decision 2016-03 (AAO Feb. 23, 2016) Purpose This policy memorandum (PM) designates the attached decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in Matter of L-S-M- as an Adopted Decision. Accordingly, this adopted decision establishes policy guidance that applies to and binds all U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) employees. USCIS personnel are directed to follow the reasoning in this decision in similar cases. Matter of L-S-M- clarifies that the exception to the civil penalties for failure to comply with an order of voluntary departure, available for certain victims of domestic violence or related abuse, does not extend to U-1 nonimmigrant victims of qualifying criminal activity. See sections 240B(d)(1)-(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. That said, the civil penalties only apply if an alien’s failure to timely depart was voluntary. Matter of Zmijewska, 24 I&N Dec. 87 (BIA 2007), followed. Use This PM is intended solely for the guidance of USCIS personnel in the performance of their official duties. It is not intended to, does not, and may not be relied upon to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or by any individual or other party in removal proceedings, in litigation with the United States, or in any other form or manner. Contact Information Questions or suggestions regarding this PM should be addressed through appropriate directorate channels to the AAO.

2016年5月13日 PM-602-0133 政策备忘录 主题：Matter of L-S-M-，已采纳决定 2016-03（AAO 2016年2月23日） 目的 本政策备忘录（PM）将所附行政上诉办公室（AAO）在 Matter of L-S-M- 中的决定指定为已采纳决定。因此，本已采纳决定确立了适用于并约束所有美国公民及移民服务局（USCIS）雇员的政策指导。USCIS人员被指示在类似案件中遵循本决定中的推理。 Matter of L-S-M- 澄清，针对未能遵守自愿离境令的民事处罚的例外——适用于某些家庭暴力或相关虐待的受害者——不延伸适用于符合条件的犯罪活动的U-1非移民受害者。见《移民与国籍法》第240B(d)(1)-(2)条。尽管如此，民事处罚仅在外国人未及时离境系自愿的情况下适用。遵循 Matter of Zmijewska, 24 I&N Dec. 87 (BIA 2007)。 使用 本PM仅供USCIS人员在履行公务时作为指导。其不意图、也不、且不得被依赖以创设任何权利或利益，无论实体性或程序性，可在法律上或由任何个人或其他当事人在遣返程序中、在与美国的诉讼中、或以任何其他形式或方式强制执行。 联系信息 有关本PM的问题或建议应通过适当的局渠道向AAO提出。

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS OFFICE U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

行政上诉办公室 美国公民及移民服务局

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

国土安全部

February 23, 2016 [1]

2016年2月23日 [1]

(1) The exception under section 240B(d)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to the civil penalties for failure to comply with an order of voluntary departure, available for certain victims of domestic violence or related abuse, does not extend to U-1 nonimmigrant victims of qualifying criminal activity. (2) The civil penalties under section 240B(d)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act apply only to aliens who voluntarily fail to comply with an order of voluntary departure. Matter of Zmijewska, 24 I&N Dec. 87 (BIA 2007), followed. FOR THE APPLICANT: John L. Minnella, Esquire, Santa Ana, California The Applicant seeks to become a lawful permanent resident based on her U-1 nonimmigrant status. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 245(m), 8 U.S.C. § 1255(m). The Director, Vermont Service Center, initially denied the application. The matter is now before us on certification. Upon de novo review, we will withdraw the initial decision and remand the matter to the Director for further proceedings consistent with this decision and for the entry of a new decision.

(1) 《移民与国籍法》第240B(d)(2)条规定的、针对未能遵守自愿离境令的民事处罚的例外——适用于某些家庭暴力或相关虐待的受害者——不延伸适用于符合条件的犯罪活动的U-1非移民受害者。 (2) 《移民与国籍法》第240B(d)(1)条规定的民事处罚仅适用于自愿未能遵守自愿离境令的外国人。遵循 Matter of Zmijewska, 24 I&N Dec. 87 (BIA 2007)。 申请人代理人：John L. Minnella, Esquire, Santa Ana, California 申请人寻求基于其U-1非移民身份成为合法永久居民。见《移民与国籍法》（本法）第245(m)条，8 U.S.C. § 1255(m)。佛蒙特服务中心主任最初否决了该申请。本事项现因认证而提交至本办公室。经重新审查，本办公室将撤回初始决定，并将本事项发回主任，以便按照本决定进行进一步程序并作出新决定。

I. PERTINENT FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The Applicant is a native and citizen of Mexico who was placed into removal proceedings under section 240 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1229a, for having entered the United States without inspection. At the conclusion of those proceedings, the immigration judge granted her the privilege of voluntary departure until March 12, 2007, as authorized under section 240B of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1229c, with an alternate order of removal to Mexico should she fail to depart as required. The Applicant reserved her right to appeal and her attorney indicated that she would advise the Applicant of the 1 On May 13, 2016, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services designated this Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) decision as an Adopted Decision. The original AAO decision is Matter of L-S-M-, ID# 14367 (AAO Feb. 23, 2016).

I. 相关事实与程序历史 申请人是墨西哥国民和公民，因未经检查进入美国而根据本法第240条，8 U.S.C. § 1229a，被置于遣返程序中。在这些程序结束时，移民法官授予她自愿离境的特权，直至2007年3月12日，依据本法第240B条，8 U.S.C. § 1229c的授权，并附有若她未按要求离境则替代遣返至墨西哥的命令。申请人保留了上诉权，其律师表示将告知申请人 1 2016年5月13日，美国公民及移民服务局将本行政上诉办公室（AAO）决定指定为已采纳决定。原始AAO决定为 Matter of L-S-M-, ID# 14367 (AAO Feb. 23, 2016)。

Matter of L-S-M- Adopted Decision

Matter of L-S-M- 已采纳决定

consequences of failing to voluntarily depart the United States as required, including the penalties described at section 240B(d)(1) of the Act, which include a 10-year bar from eligibility for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1255. The Applicant properly filed an appeal with the Board of Immigration Appeals (the Board), which the Board dismissed. In its decision, the Board extended the Applicant’s voluntary departure period until October 14, 2008, and also included written notice of the penalties for failure to depart under section 240B(d)(1) of the Act. The Applicant, however, did not depart the United States as required in the time specified, and has remained in the United States without interruption. The Applicant subsequently filed a Form I-918, Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status, in February 2009, seeking U-1 nonimmigrant status as a victim of qualifying criminal activity. 2 The Applicant’s request was granted and, in April 2013, she applied for adjustment of status by filing a Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, based on her U-1 nonimmigrant status. The Director denied the Applicant’s Form I-485, determining that, pursuant to section 240B(d)(1) of the Act, the Applicant is ineligible for lawful permanent resident status until October 14, 2018 (10 years from the final date of her voluntary departure), because she failed to timely depart the United States as required. The Director has certified the matter to us as a novel legal issue because the civil penalties at section 240B(d)(1) of the Act pre-date the codification of the adjustment of status provisions for U nonimmigrants found at subsection 245(m) of the Act, raising the question of whether they should apply in light of the later provisions. The Director notified the Applicant of the certification and provided 30 days to submit a written brief or other written statement, but we received no brief or further evidence from the Applicant. 8 C.F.R. § 103.4(a)(2).

未能按要求自愿离开美国的后果，包括本法第240B(d)(1)条所述的处罚，其中包括根据本法第245条，8 U.S.C. § 1255，10年内无资格获得调整身份。 申请人适当地向移民上诉委员会（委员会）提出上诉，委员会予以驳回。在其决定中，委员会将申请人的自愿离境期限延长至2008年10月14日，并还包括根据本法第240B(d)(1)条未能离境的处罚的书面通知。 然而，申请人未在规定时间内按要求离开美国，并一直不间断地留在美国。申请人随后于2009年2月提交了I-918表，U非移民身份申请，寻求作为符合条件的犯罪活动受害者的U-1非移民身份。2 申请人的请求获得批准，并于2013年4月，她基于其U-1非移民身份提交了I-485表，登记永久居留或调整身份申请，申请调整身份。 主任否决了申请人的I-485表，认定根据本法第240B(d)(1)条，申请人无资格获得合法永久居民身份直至2018年10月14日（其自愿离境最后日期起10年），因为她未能按要求及时离开美国。 主任将本事项认证至本办公室，作为一个新颖的法律问题，因为本法第240B(d)(1)条的民事处罚早于本法第245(m)条中U非移民调整身份条款的编纂，提出了这些处罚是否应在后来的条款下适用的问题。主任通知申请人认证事宜并给予30天提交书面简报或其他书面陈述，但本办公室未收到申请人的任何简报或进一步证据。8 C.F.R. § 103.4(a)(2)。

II. APPLICABLE LAW A. Statute 1. Adjustment of Status for U Nonimmigrants Section 245 of the Act provides generally for the adjustment of status of nonimmigrants to lawful permanent residents. The requirements for U nonimmigrants are included specifically at subsection 245(m) of the Act. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has exclusive jurisdiction over a Form I-485 filed pursuant to this subsection. 8 C.F.R. § 245.24(k).

II. 适用法律 A. 法规 1. U非移民的调整身份 本法第245条一般规定非移民调整身份为合法永久居民。U非移民的要求具体包含在本法第245(m)条中。美国公民及移民服务局（USCIS）对根据本款提交的I-485表拥有专属管辖权。8 C.F.R. § 245.24(k)。

2. Civil Penalties for Failure to Voluntarily Depart

2. 未能自愿离境的民事处罚

2 “U-1” classification affords nonimmigrant status to victims of certain crimes who assist authorities investigating or prosecuting the criminal activity. Section 101(a)(15)(U) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(U).

2 “U-1”分类赋予协助当局调查或起诉犯罪活动的某些犯罪受害者非移民身份。本法第101(a)(15)(U)条，8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(U)。

2

2

Matter of L-S-M- Adopted Decision

Matter of L-S-M- 已采纳决定

Individuals in removal proceedings who are granted voluntary departure in lieu of an order of removal are subject to certain penalties if they fail to timely depart the United States. These penalties, which include a 10-year period of ineligibility for relief under section 245 of the Act, are outlined at section 240B of the Act. This section states, in pertinent part, as follows:

在遣返程序中被授予自愿离境以代替遣返令的个人，若未能及时离开美国，将受到某些处罚。这些处罚，包括根据本法第245条10年内无资格获得救济，在本法第240B条中概述。该条规定，在相关部分如下：

(d) Civil Penalty for Failure To Depart

(d) 未能离境的民事处罚

(1) IN GENERAL- Subject to paragraph (2), if an alien is permitted to depart voluntarily under this section and voluntarily fails to depart the United States within the time period specified, the alien--

(1) 一般规定——在符合第(2)款的前提下，如果外国人被允许根据本条自愿离境并自愿未在规定时间内离开美国，该外国人——

(A) shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $1,000 and not more than $5,000; and (B) shall be ineligible, for a period of 10 years, to receive any further relief under this section and sections 240A, 245, 248, and 249. (2) APPLICATION OF VAWA PROTECTIONS 3 - The restrictions on relief under paragraph (1) shall not apply to relief under section 240A or 245 on the basis of a petition filed by a VAWA self-petitioner, 4 or a petition filed under section 240A(b)(2), or under section 244(a)(3) (as in effect prior to March 31, 1997), if the extreme cruelty or battery was at least one central reason for the alien’s overstaying the grant of voluntary departure. (3) NOTICE OF PENALTIES- The order permitting an alien to depart voluntarily shall inform the alien of the penalties under this subsection. Section 240B(d) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(d) (emphasis added). The civil penalties under section 240B(d) of the Act were initially created in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1990 (IMMACT 90), Pub. L. No. 101-649, 104 Stat. 4978 (1990), and contained an exception for “exceptional circumstances” for the alien’s failure to timely depart voluntarily. 5 These civil penalties were substantially modified through passage of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), Div. C of Pub. L. No. 104-208, § 304(a)(3), 110 Stat. 3009 (1996), which eliminated the earlier “exceptional circumstances” exception.

(A) 应受到不低于$1,000且不超过$5,000的民事处罚；且 (B) 应在10年内无资格根据本条及第240A、245、248和249条获得任何进一步救济。 (2) VAWA保护措施的适用 3 ——第(1)款下对救济的限制不适用于基于VAWA自我申请人4提交的申请、或根据第240A(b)(2)条提交的申请、或根据第244(a)(3)条（截至1997年3月31日有效）提交的申请而获得的第240A条或第245条下的救济，如果极端残忍或殴打是外国人逾期居留自愿离境授予的至少一个核心原因。 (3) 处罚通知——允许外国人自愿离境的命令应告知外国人本款下的处罚。 本法第240B(d)条，8 U.S.C. § 1229c(d)（强调为后加）。本法第240B(d)条下的民事处罚最初创建于《1990年移民与国籍法》（IMMACT 90），Pub. L. No. 101-649, 104 Stat. 4978 (1990)，并包含对外国人未能及时自愿离境的“特殊情况”例外。5 这些民事处罚通过《1996年非法移民改革与移民责任法》（IIRIRA），Pub. L. No. 104-208第C部分，§ 304(a)(3), 110 Stat. 3009 (1996)的通过而被实质性修改，该法取消了先前的“特殊情况”例外。

3 The acronym “VAWA” means “The Violence Against Women Act,” which allows an abused spouse, child or parent of a U.S. citizen, or an abused spouse or child of a lawful permanent resident, to self-petition for immigrant classification rather than remain with or rely upon the abuser to secure that benefit. See section 204(a)(1)(A)-(B) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(1)(A)-(B). 4 The term “VAWA self-petitioner” has a specific meaning when used throughout the Act, and is not limited to only persons seeking immigrant classification as abused spouses, children or parents under section 204 of the Act. See section 101(a)(51) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(51). 5 Under IMMACT 90, the term “exceptional circumstances” was defined as “the serious illness of the alien or death of an immediate relative of the alien, but not including less compelling circumstances that were beyond the control of the alien.” Section 242B(f)(2) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1252b(f)(2), repealed by IIRIRA.

3 缩写“VAWA”意为“《暴力侵害妇女法》”，该法允许美国公民受虐待的配偶、子女或父母，或合法永久居民受虐待的配偶或子女，自我申请移民分类，而不是留在施虐者身边或依赖施虐者获得该利益。见本法第204(a)(1)(A)-(B)条，8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(1)(A)-(B)。 4 术语“VAWA自我申请人”在本法通篇使用时具有特定含义，并不限于仅根据本法第204条寻求作为受虐待配偶、子女或父母移民分类的人。见本法第101(a)(51)条，8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(51)。 5 在IMMACT 90下，术语“特殊情况”被定义为“外国人的严重疾病或外国人直系亲属的死亡，但不包括超出外国人控制范围的较不紧迫的情况。”本法第242B(f)(2)条，8 U.S.C. § 1252b(f)(2)，被IIRIRA废除。

3

3

Matter of L-S-M- Adopted Decision

Matter of L-S-M- 已采纳决定

In 2005, nine years after the IIRIRA amendments, Congress revisited the voluntary departure statute by enacting a new exception to the civil penalties under section 240B(d) for certain victims of domestic violence or related abuse. Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005 (VAWA 2005), Pub. L. No. 109-162, §§ 811-812, 119 Stat. 2960, 3057 (2006). These provisions are currently found in subsection (2) of section 240B(d) as set forth above. B. Case Law In Matter of Zmijewska, 24 I&N Dec. 87 (BIA 2007), the Board contrasted the term “exceptional circumstances” used in IMMACT 90 with the phrase “voluntarily fails to depart” that first appeared through the passage of IIRIRA. The Board’s discussion of the differences between these two concepts provides a framework for determining whether an individual’s failure to depart the United States was voluntary:

2005年，即IIRIRA修正案通过九年后，国会重新审视了自愿离境法规，针对某些家庭暴力或相关虐待的受害者，在section 240B(d)下的民事处罚中新增了一项例外。2005年《反对暴力侵害妇女与司法部再授权法案》（VAWA 2005），Pub. L. No. 109-162, §§ 811-812, 119 Stat. 2960, 3057（2006）。这些条款目前载于上文所述的section 240B(d)第(2)款。 B. 判例法 在Matter of Zmijewska, 24 I&N Dec. 87 (BIA 2007)中，委员会将IMMACT 90中使用的“exceptional circumstances”（特殊情况）一词与通过IIRIRA首次出现的“voluntarily fails to depart”（自愿未能离境）一语进行了对比。委员会对这两个概念之间差异的讨论，为判断个人未能离开美国是否属于自愿提供了框架：

The term “voluntarily” ordinarily refers to conduct that is “brought about of one’s own accord or by free choice. . . .” Congress has used the phrase “voluntarily fails” in a number of provisions. . . . In each instance, the phrase “voluntarily fails” refers to a failure to complete an act or requirement within the actor’s control. . . . Under the terms of section 240B(d) of the Act, a respondent who, through no fault of her own, remains unaware of the grant of voluntary departure until after the period for voluntary departure has expired cannot be said to have “voluntarily” failed to depart within the period of voluntary departure. We emphasize that the “voluntariness” exception is not a substitute for the repealed “exceptional circumstances” exception. It is a much narrower exception limited to situations in which an alien, through no fault of his or her own, is unaware of the voluntary departure order or is physically unable to depart. It would not include situations in which departure within the period granted would involve exceptional hardships to the alien or close family members. Nor would lack of funds for departure be considered an involuntary failure to depart. 24 I&N Dec. at 93-94.

“自愿”一词通常指“出于本人自主意愿或自由选择而引发”的行为……国会在多项条款中使用了“自愿未能”这一表述……在每一情形中，“自愿未能”均指未能完成行为人控制范围内的某一行为或要求……根据该法section 240B(d)的规定，如果答辩人并非因自身过错，在自愿离境期限届满之后才得知自愿离境获准，则不能认定其在自愿离境期限内“自愿”未能离境。 我们强调，“自愿性”例外并非对被废止的“特殊情况”例外的替代。它是一个范围窄得多的例外，仅限于外国人并非因自身过错而不知悉自愿离境令或客观上无法离境的情形。它不包括在获准期限内离境将给该外国人或其近亲属造成特殊困难的情形。离境资金缺乏也不视为非自愿未能离境。 24 I&N Dec. at 93-94。

III. ANALYSIS The issues we must resolve are whether U nonimmigrants are also included under the VAWA exception at section 240B(d)(2) of the Act and, if not, whether the Applicant has demonstrated that she did not “voluntarily fail to depart” the United States by October 14, 2008. The Director correctly notes that the civil penalties for not complying with the terms of a voluntary departure order first appeared in IMMACT 90 and thus pre-date the creation of the U crime victim adjustment provisions at subsection 245(m) of the Act. Congress created the U adjustment provisions a decade later in the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000

III. 分析 我们必须解决的问题是：U非移民是否也属于该法section 240B(d)(2)中VAWA例外的涵盖范围；如果不属于，申请人是否已证明其未在2008年10月14日之前“自愿未能离境”美国。 主任正确地指出，未遵守自愿离境令条款的民事处罚最早出现于IMMACT 90，因此早于该法subsection 245(m)中U犯罪受害者调整身份条款的创设。国会在十年后通过2000年《贩运与暴力受害者保护法》创设了U调整身份条款

4

4

Matter of L-S-M- Adopted Decision

Matter of L-S-M- 已采纳决定

(VTVPA), Pub. L. No. 106-386, 114 Stat. 1464 (2000). 6 In addition, the purpose of the U and VAWA provisions is similar, in that both offer immigration benefits for the victims of certain crimes and domestic abuse, respectively. Although the U nonimmigrant classification did not exist in 1990 when the civil penalties were originally enacted, or in 1996 when the penalties were amended, the ability of U nonimmigrants to adjust status under subsection 245(m) of the Act had existed for more than five years by the time Congress passed VAWA 2005. Although Congress created an exception from the civil penalties under section 240B(d)(2) of the Act in this legislation for VAWA self-petitioners, it did not do so for U nonimmigrants. Moreover, Congress similarly did not do so later when it enacted the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (VAWA 2013), Pub. L. No. 113-14, 127 Stat. 54 (2013), the most recent legislation with provisions impacting U nonimmigrants. These facts are significant because “[C]ongress is assumed to act with the knowledge of existing law and interpretations when it passes new legislation.” White v. Mercury Marine, Div. of Brunswick, Inc., 129 F.3d 1428, 1434 (11th Cir. 1997) (citing Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Curran, 456 U.S. 353, 382 (1982)).

（VTVPA），Pub. L. No. 106-386, 114 Stat. 1464（2000）。6 此外，U条款与VAWA条款的目的相似，因为二者分别针对某些犯罪受害者和家庭虐待受害者提供移民福利。 尽管U非移民分类在1990年民事处罚最初制定时并不存在，在1996年处罚被修订时也不存在，但截至国会通过VAWA 2005时，U非移民根据该法subsection 245(m)调整身份的能力已存在五年以上。尽管国会在该立法中为VAWA自我申请人创设了该法section 240B(d)(2)下民事处罚的例外，但并未为U非移民创设此类例外。此外，国会后来在通过2013年《反对暴力侵害妇女再授权法案》（VAWA 2013），Pub. L. No. 113-14, 127 Stat. 54（2013）——最近一部含有影响U非移民条款的立法——时，同样未如此行事。这些事实意义重大，因为“推定国会在通过新立法时知悉现行法律及解释。”White v. Mercury Marine, Div. of Brunswick, Inc., 129 F.3d 1428, 1434 (11th Cir. 1997)（引Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Curran, 456 U.S. 353, 382 (1982)）。

We recognize that a central purpose in creating the U nonimmigrant classification was to protect crime victims in keeping with the humanitarian interests of the United States. 7 In this regard, the U nonimmigrant category does serve a similar purpose to the VAWA provisions. Nevertheless, only three classes of individuals are specified at section 240B(d)(2) of the Act who may be protected from the civil penalties thereunder: VAWA self-petitioners; individuals who file petitions for special rule cancellation as battered spouses or children under section 240A(b)(2) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2); and individuals who filed for suspension of deportation as battered spouses under former section 244(a)(3) of the Act (pre-IIRIRA). Persons in valid U status are not enumerated under section 240B(d)(2) of the Act. In addition, the statutory authorities relating to U nonimmigrants at sections 101(a)(15)(U) and 214(p) of the Act are not included in the definition of “VAWA self-petitioner” at section 101(a)(51) of the Act. When Congress includes language in one part of a statute, but omits in others, it is presumed to do so purposefully. Russello v. United States, 464 U.S. 16, 23 (1983) (citing United States v. Wong Kim Bo, 472 F.2d 720, 722 (5th Cir. 1972)). The plain language of the statute excludes U nonimmigrants from the exception to the penalties listed at section 240B(d)(1) of the Act, and so we conclude that the Applicant cannot avail herself of its protections. 8 Although the Applicant does not fall within the VAWA protections at section 240B(d)(2) of the Act, the civil penalties under that provision would not apply to her if she can demonstrate that she did not “voluntarily fail to depart” the United States prior to the final October 14, 2008, deadline that the Board imposed. Matter of Zmijewska, 24 I&N Dec. at 93-94.

我们认识到，创设U非移民分类的核心目的之一，是依照美国的人道主义利益保护犯罪受害者。7 在这方面，U非移民类别确实与VAWA条款服务于相似目的。然而，该法section 240B(d)(2)仅明确规定了三类可受其下民事处罚保护的个人：VAWA自我申请人；根据该法section 240A(b)(2)、8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2)作为受虐配偶或子女申请特殊规则取消递解的个人；以及根据原该法section 244(a)(3)（IIRIRA之前）作为受虐配偶申请暂停递解的个人。处于有效U身份的人员未在该法section 240B(d)(2)中列举。此外，该法sections 101(a)(15)(U)和214(p)中有关U非移民的法定授权，未被纳入该法section 101(a)(51)对“VAWA自我申请人”的定义中。当国会在法规某一部分纳入某语言而在其他部分省略时，推定其系有意为之。Russello v. United States, 464 U.S. 16, 23 (1983)（引United States v. Wong Kim Bo, 472 F.2d 720, 722 (5th Cir. 1972)）。法规的平实语言将该法section 240B(d)(1)所列处罚例外中的U非移民排除在外，因此我们认定申请人不能援用其保护。8 尽管申请人不属于该法section 240B(d)(2)中VAWA保护的范围，但如果她能证明其未在委员会设定的最终2008年10月14日截止日期之前“自愿未能离境”美国，则该条款下的民事处罚将不适用于她。Matter of Zmijewska, 24 I&N Dec. at 93-94。

6 The VTVPA included among its many provisions the Violence Against Women Act of 2000 (VAWA 2000), which created the U nonimmigrant visa category and the related adjustment of status provisions within the Battered Immigrant Women Protection Act (BIWPA). See VAWA 2000, Title V, BIWPA at § 1513. 7 H.R. Rep. No. 106-939, at 72 (2000). 8 We note that the Applicant also has not sought relief from removal as a battered spouse under section 240A(b)(2) of the Act or former section 244(a)(3) of the Act.

6 VTVPA在其众多条款中包含了2000年《反对暴力侵害妇女法案》（VAWA 2000），该法案在《受虐移民妇女保护法》（BIWPA）中创设了U非移民签证类别及相关的调整身份条款。见VAWA 2000, Title V, BIWPA at § 1513。 7 H.R. Rep. No. 106-939, at 72 (2000)。 8 我们注意到，申请人也未根据该法section 240A(b)(2)或原该法section 244(a)(3)作为受虐配偶寻求免于递解的救济。

5

5

Matter of L-S-M- Adopted Decision

Matter of L-S-M- 已采纳决定

The record does not reflect that the Applicant has had an opportunity to demonstrate whether or not her failure to depart was voluntary under the framework discussed in Zmijewska. Accordingly, we will remand the matter to the Director to develop the record on this issue, such as through the issuance of a request for evidence, and thereafter to determine whether she is subject to the civil penalties at section 240B(d)(1) of the Act.

记录未反映申请人曾有机会根据Zmijewska中讨论的框架证明其未能离境是否属于自愿。因此，我们将此事发回主任，以就该问题完善记录，例如通过发出补充证据请求，并随后裁定其是否受该法section 240B(d)(1)下民事处罚的约束。

IV. CONCLUSION The exception for the civil penalties for failure to voluntarily depart the United States in section 240B(d)(2) of the Act is available to certain victims of domestic violence under the Violence Against Women Act, or “VAWA self-petitioners,” as that term is defined under section 101(a)(51) of the Act. The exception does not apply to U nonimmigrant victims of specified criminal activity under section 101(a)(15)(U) of the Act. A U nonimmigrant who failed to depart the United States during the period of voluntary departure is barred from adjusting status under section 245 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1255, for a period of 10 years, unless he or she can establish that the failure to depart was not voluntary. Matter of Zmijewska, 24 I&N Dec. at 93-94. The Applicant bears the burden of establishing her eligibility for lawful permanent resident status under subsection 245(m) of the Act. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. The Director was correct in finding that the Applicant is subject to the civil penalties at section 240B(d)(1) of the Act, and therefore is ineligible to adjust her status under section 245(m). We withdraw the Director’s decision, however, so that the Director may provide the Applicant with an opportunity to submit evidence demonstrating the voluntary or involuntary nature of her failure to depart the United States during the prescribed period. ORDER: The initial decision of the Director, Vermont Service Center, is withdrawn. The matter is remanded to the Director, Vermont Service Center, for further proceedings consistent with the foregoing opinion and for the entry of a new decision. Cite as Matter of L-S-M-, Adopted Decision 2016-03 (AAO Feb. 23, 2016)

IV. 结论 该法section 240B(d)(2)中针对未能自愿离境美国的民事处罚例外，适用于《反对暴力侵害妇女法案》下某些家庭暴力受害者，即该法section 101(a)(51)所定义的“VAWA自我申请人”。该例外不适用于该法section 101(a)(15)(U)下特定犯罪活动的U非移民受害者。在自愿离境期限内未能离境美国的U非移民，在10年内不得根据该法section 245、8 U.S.C. § 1255调整身份，除非其能证明未能离境并非自愿。Matter of Zmijewska, 24 I&N Dec. at 93-94。 申请人负有证明其根据该法subsection 245(m)符合合法永久居民身份资格的责任。该法Section 291, 8 U.S.C. § 1361。主任认定申请人受该法section 240B(d)(1)下民事处罚约束，因而无资格根据section 245(m)调整身份，这一认定是正确的。然而，我们撤回主任的决定，以便主任可以给申请人机会提交证据，证明其在规定期限内未能离境美国属于自愿或非自愿性质。 命令： 佛蒙特服务中心主任的初步决定予以撤回。此事发回佛蒙特服务中心主任，按照上述意见进一步审理并作出新决定。 引用为Matter of L-S-M-, Adopted Decision 2016-03 (AAO Feb. 23, 2016)

6

6