Administrative closure
Administrative closure pauses a removal case. The judge takes it off the active calendar, no hearings are scheduled, and no removal order is entered while it stays closed. It is not a grant of anything and it is not status, but it is often the difference between a removal order and a green card, because it lets USCIS decide a petition the immigration judge cannot. The authority was taken away by an Attorney General decision, restored by another in 2021, and written into the regulations in 2024.
Current as of September 2026. We re-check this page every quarter and after any rule change.
Administrative closure is one of the ways a case can be ended or paused without any application for relief, and it belongs on the checklist at every form of relief next to termination and dismissal by the government. It differs from both. Termination ends the case. Dismissal ends it on the government's motion. Closure suspends it, for as long as it takes for something outside the courtroom to be decided.
The authority, and its history
For decades immigration judges administratively closed cases as a matter of docket management. Then the Attorney General held in Matter of Castro-Tum that judges and the Board had no general authority to do so, and the practice largely stopped. In Matter of Cruz-Valdez, 28 I&N Dec. 326 (A.G. 2021), the Attorney General overruled Castro-Tum and restored the authority of immigration judges and the Board to administratively close cases.
On May 29, 2024, EOIR published "Efficient Case and Docket Management in Immigration Proceedings," 89 FR 46742, effective July 29, 2024, which wrote the authority into the regulations at 8 C.F.R. 1003.18(c). The regulation confirms that an immigration judge may administratively close a case, sets out the factors to be considered, and provides for recalendaring. The same rule codified termination at 8 C.F.R. 1003.18(d).
We cite the regulation, and we check it
Rules published in 2024 have been reviewed and in some cases rescinded since January 2025. As of the date on this page, 8 C.F.R. 1003.18(c) is in force as published, and we confirm that against the Federal Register before we file a motion that relies on it. If that changes, this page will say so. Cruz-Valdez is a separate source of the same authority and would survive a change to the regulation unless it, too, were revisited.
The Avetisyan factors
In Matter of Avetisyan, 25 I&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2012), the Board set out the factors a judge weighs on a motion to administratively close, and 8 C.F.R. 1003.18(c) carries them forward:
- The reason closure is sought. What is pending elsewhere, and how it would affect the case.
- The basis for any opposition. A party's objection is a factor, not a veto. The judge asks why the party objects and whether the reason is a good one.
- The likelihood the respondent will succeed on the collateral matter. A petition that is prima facie approvable weighs heavily; one with obvious problems does not.
- The anticipated duration of the closure. How long the collateral matter is expected to take.
- Responsibility for any delay. Whether the respondent has been diligent, and whether the delay lies with USCIS or another agency.
- The ultimate anticipated outcome when the case is recalendared: whether the collateral matter, if it succeeds, would resolve the case.
The motion is built factor by factor. It attaches the receipt for the pending petition, evidence that the petition is approvable, an honest estimate of the time, and an explanation of what happens to the removal case if the petition is approved.
Typical uses
Closure is asked for when the immigration judge cannot decide the thing that would resolve the case, and another agency can. The Board has narrowed the tool since the 2024 rule: in Matter of B-N-K-, 29 I&N Dec. 96 (BIA 2025), it held that closure is for "a reasonably short period," and in Matter of Ibarra-Vega, 29 I&N Dec. 476 (BIA 2026), that closure is not a de facto form of relief and is inappropriate over DHS objection where a U visa is not available in the reasonably near future. So the motion has to show a specific pending matter with a foreseeable end, not an open-ended wait. The common situations:
| Pending elsewhere | Who decides it | Why the court waits | Read |
|---|---|---|---|
| Form I-130 family petition | USCIS | The judge has no jurisdiction over the petition under 8 C.F.R. 1245.2(a)(1), but has exclusive jurisdiction over the adjustment application once it is approved. Closure or a continuance under the Hashmi factors lets USCIS act | Adjustment in court |
| U visa, Form I-918 | USCIS, exclusively | Under Matter of Sanchez Sosa, 25 I&N Dec. 807 (BIA 2012), a judge should generally continue proceedings for a prima facie approvable U petition, and the wait for a number is long | U visa |
| Special Immigrant Juvenile, Form I-360 | USCIS, after a state court order | The petition and any resulting adjustment depend on a state juvenile court finding and a USCIS decision the judge cannot make | SIJS |
| Temporary Protected Status | USCIS, with de novo review by the judge after a denial | A grant would resolve the case for the duration of the designation | TPS |
Where the delay is USCIS's own, closure and a mandamus action are not alternatives; they work together. The court waits, and the federal district court is asked to compel USCIS to decide. That practice is at uscisdelay.com, linked below.
Recalendaring
A closed case is not over. Either party may move to recalendar it, and 8 C.F.R. 1003.18(c) provides for that motion. The government moves to recalendar when it wants the case to proceed, for example after a petition is denied. The respondent moves to recalendar when the petition is approved and the judge can now grant adjustment, or when the parties are ready to move to terminate. The case resumes where it left off: the pleadings stand, the applications on file stand, and new deadlines are set.
Closure is not status
While the case is closed you have whatever status you had before, and no more. Closure does not by itself confer any benefit, and it does not prevent the government from moving to put the case back on the calendar. It is a pause, and its value is entirely in what gets done during the pause.
Closure, continuance, termination or dismissal
| Vehicle | What it does | Who moves | Standard |
|---|---|---|---|
| Administrative closure | Removes the case from the active docket until recalendared | Either party, or the judge | Avetisyan factors; 8 C.F.R. 1003.18(c) |
| Continuance | Postpones the next hearing to a new date | Either party | Good cause under 8 C.F.R. 1003.29; Matter of L-A-B-R-, 27 I&N Dec. 405 (A.G. 2018); the Hashmi factors for a pending family petition |
| Termination | Ends the case with no order and no relief | Respondent, or the judge on a regulatory ground | 8 C.F.R. 1003.18(d) and the grounds at motions to terminate |
| Dismissal | Ends the case on the government's motion | DHS | 8 C.F.R. 1239.2(c); see prosecutorial discretion |
A continuance is the lighter tool, for a matter expected to resolve by the next hearing. Under Matter of L-A-B-R-, the primary factors are the likelihood the collateral relief will be granted and whether it would materially affect the outcome. Closure is asked for when the wait is long or its length is unknown, and termination or dismissal when the case should not continue at all. The motions are often filed in the alternative.
There is no government filing fee for a motion to administratively close or to recalendar a case pending before the immigration judge. Fees apply to motions to reopen and reconsider after a decision, and those are government fees, not our legal fees.
A closed case waits on USCIS. When USCIS will not decide the I-130, I-918 or I-360 that would end the removal case, a mandamus action in federal court can compel a decision. That practice is at our delay site.
Mandamus for a stalled petition at uscisdelay.com →
visa4love.comThe most common reason to close a case is a family petition. Our family immigration site handles the I-130 and the marriage-based process that the immigration judge cannot decide.
Family petitions at visa4love.com →
Read next: motions to terminate, prosecutorial discretion, adjustment in court, or every form of relief.
Common questions
What is the difference between administrative closure and termination?
Termination ends the case. Administrative closure pauses it. A terminated case is over unless DHS files a new Notice to Appear; an administratively closed case remains on the court's books and either party can move to put it back on the calendar. Closure is used when something outside the court, usually a USCIS petition, has to be decided before the case can be resolved.
Does administrative closure give me status or work authorization?
No. It is a docket management tool. Your immigration status is whatever it was before the case was closed. If the collateral matter succeeds, for example USCIS approves a petition, the case is recalendared and the judge can then grant the relief the approval made possible, or the parties can move to terminate.
Can the judge close my case if the government objects?
Yes. Under Matter of Cruz-Valdez, 28 I&N Dec. 326 (A.G. 2021), and 8 C.F.R. 1003.18(c), the immigration judge has authority to administratively close a case over a party's objection. The basis for the opposition is one of the factors the judge weighs under Matter of Avetisyan, 25 I&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2012), not a veto.
How does the case get reopened after closure?
Either party moves to recalendar it. The motion is granted when the reason for closure has ended or the case otherwise needs to proceed. The case then resumes from where it was, with hearings scheduled and filing deadlines set, and no removal order has been entered in the meantime.
Tell us where your case is. We will tell you what is still possible.
You get a free case review with an attorney, in your language. We speak English, Russian, Spanish and Uzbek in-house, and we bring in a live interpreter for anything else. We will tell you what stage you are at, which forms of relief are open to you, what your deadlines are, and whether we can help. If we cannot, we will say so.