On August 13, 2026, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) issued a significant precedent decision, Matter of Delcarmen-Lara, 29 I&N Dec. 830 (BIA 2026), overturning the long-standing rule established in Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly. This decision fundamentally changes how travel on Advance Parole is treated for individuals who have accrued unlawful presence in the United States. 

What Changed? 

For more than a decade, Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly provided that a departure from the United States pursuant to Advance Parole was not considered a “departure” for purposes of triggering the three- and ten-year unlawful presence bars under INA § 212(a)(9)(B). 

As a result, many individuals with pending adjustment of status applications were able to travel internationally using Advance Parole and return to the United States without triggering the unlawful presence bars. 

That protection is no longer available under the BIA’s new decision. 

In Matter of Delcarmen-Lara, the BIA held that a departure from the United States pursuant to Advance Parole constitutes a departure for purposes of INA § 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II). Consequently, individuals who have accrued sufficient unlawful presence before departing may trigger either the three or ten-year bar upon leaving the United States, even if they traveled with valid Advance Parole authorization. 

Who May Be Affected? 

This decision may have significant consequences for noncitizens who have a history of unlawful presence and are considering international travel. 

The decision is especially important for: 

• DACA recipients who initially entered the United States without inspection; 
• Adjustment of status applicants with pending Form I-485 applications; 
• Individuals who accrued significant periods of unlawful presence before obtaining their current immigration status or benefit; 
• Individuals with approved Advance Parole documents; and 
• Anyone planning international travel while relying on Advance Parole for reentry. 

Why This Matters 

Practically speaking, an individual who accrued more than one year of unlawful presence and departs the United States on Advance Parole may now trigger the ten-year unlawful presence bar under INA § 212(a)(9)(B). 

Similarly, an individual who accrued more than 180 days but less than one year of unlawful presence may trigger the three-year bar. 

For many applicants, overcoming these bars may require filing Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility. Importantly, eligibility for an unlawful presence waiver generally requires a qualifying relative, such as a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident spouse or parent. A U.S. citizen child is not a qualifying relative for purposes of this waiver. 

Advance Parole Approval Does Not Guarantee Protection from Unlawful Presence Bars 

One of the most important takeaways from this decision is that the mere approval of Advance Parole does not eliminate inadmissibility concerns arising from unlawful presence. 

Individuals who previously believed that travel on Advance Parole would not trigger the unlawful presence bars should carefully reevaluate any travel plans considering this new precedent. Even applicants who already possess an approved Advance Parole document should consult with experienced immigration counsel before departing the United States. 

What Should You Do? 

Individuals with a history of unlawful presence, an approved Advance Parole document, a pending adjustment of status application, or plans for international travel should carefully evaluate the potential immigration consequences before departing the United States.  

Considering the BIA’s decision in Matter of Delcarmen-Lara, travel that was previously viewed as low risk may now trigger the threeor ten-year unlawful presence bars for certain individuals. Accordingly, we strongly recommend that anyone considering travel on Advance Parole first have their complete immigration history reviewed by experienced immigration counsel. The consequences of triggering an unlawful presence bar can be significant and, in some cases, may be difficult or costly to overcome after departure. 

Contact Foster LLP 

This decision represents one of the most consequential changes to Advance Parole travel in many years and may impact thousands of individuals with pending immigration matters. 

If you have questions about how Matter of Delcarmen-Lara may affect your case, or if you are considering international travel relying on Advance Parole, please contact Foster LLP. Our immigration attorneys are available to review your immigration history, assess potential risks, and help you determine the best course of action before you travel. 

Foster LLP will continue to closely track the implementation of this decision and provide clients with timely updates, practical recommendations, and strategic insights through our Immigration Updates©, articles, and blogs at www.fosterglobal.com.