CA10 on Choice of Law, 212(h): Medina-Rosales v. Holder

"Mr. Medina-Rosales was issued a Notice of Hearing stating that a master hearing would be held before an IJ in Tulsa.  The Dallas-based IJ indeed held video conference hearings with Mr. Medina-Rosales and his counsel, who were in Tulsa. ... The IJ’s presence in Dallas and the fact that proceedings were conducted by video conference did not change the place of the hearings from Tulsa to Dallas.  Because Tulsa is in the Tenth Circuit, Tenth Circuit law applies. ... Unlike many other circuits, we have not addressed a post-entry LPR’s eligibility to seek a waiver of inadmissibility under § 1182(h) and therefore have not decided whether Rodriguez controls in the Tenth Circuit. ... Because we agree with the majority of circuits, we hold that under the clear language of § 1182(h), an LPR in Mr. Medina-Rosales’ position is eligible for discretionary consideration for waiver of inadmissibility under § 1182(h).  The petition for review therefore is granted and the case is remanded for further proceedings." - Medina-Rosales v. Holder, Feb. 24, 2015.  [Hats off to Christi J. Giddeon!]