USCIS opened a fee-free process for a defined group of class members to ask the agency to reopen or reconsider certain immigration benefit decisions. The guidance, posted October 25, 2026, follows a September 28 order from the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
The process applies only to decisions connected to the April 2025 termination of parole. It does not reopen cases on its own. Applicants must make a request.
The agency says it will assess requests individually and may grant one only when the applicant establishes eligibility without considering the parole termination. Its litigation update directs applicants to instructions for the relevant benefit type.
The class covers people who meet all four conditions
The class in Sileiri Doe v. DHS, No. 1:25-cv-12245-ADB (D. Mass.), is limited to people who meet every part of the court’s definition. They must have scheduled an appointment to enter the United States using the CBP One app, then been paroled into the country between May 16, 2023, and Jan. 19, 2025.
Their parole must have been terminated in April 2025 through an email saying, “It is time for you to leave the United States,” or using similar language. They also must still be in the United States.
Those conditions exclude people who used a different parole program, such as CHNV, did not receive the specified termination email, or have left the country. A person need not have been a named plaintiff or personally joined the lawsuit to qualify.
The class action was filed August 11, 2025, by Sileiri Doe and other individual plaintiffs, along with the Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts. Judge Allison D. Burroughs later certified the class.
Only decisions connected to the termination qualify
The original decision or action must have been issued from April 1, 2025, through April 21, 2026. Applicants must explain how the parole termination affected eligibility for the benefit and why the agency should reopen or reconsider its decision.
Covered adverse actions include benefit requests that were denied, dismissed, deemed abandoned, administratively closed or rejected. The process also covers cases referred to the Executive Office for Immigration Review.
A request for employment authorization based on parole is excluded. This is a motion process, not a free appeal. Asylum and adjustment-of-status matters may qualify if they meet the other requirements.
There is no filing deadline for these requests under the court order. That does not extend separate deadlines for unrelated appeals or court proceedings.
The agency will decide each request on its own record. Class membership alone does not establish eligibility for asylum, permanent residence or another benefit, and a successful motion does not automatically restore parole or work authorization.
Applicants must follow the agency’s form-specific instructions
The agency requires applicants to use the designated form and its instructions, or another filing method it directs for class members. It points people seeking review of asylum matters to the Form I-589 website and applicants with other benefit types to the Form I-290B website.
- Asylum applicants should follow the special instructions on the Form I-589 page and send a written request to the asylum office with jurisdiction over their current residence.
- Applicants seeking review of other benefit decisions should use the specific filing directions on the Form I-290B addresses page. They should not assume the ordinary filing location or fee applies.
- Each request should describe the termination’s effect on eligibility and explain why reopening or reconsideration is warranted.
- Keep the appointment record, original parole or I-94 records, termination email, adverse decision and evidence connecting the email to the application.
The agency changed Form I-290B filing locations on October 7, 2026. It accepts filings sent to prior locations only when they are postmarked on or before November 9, 2026.
The court’s orders addressed the earlier parole termination
The lawsuit followed the government’s April 2025 mass email terminating parole for people who had entered through the appointment process. On March 31, 2026, the court certified the class, vacated those termination emails and ordered the Department of Homeland Security to reinstate parole and return class members to the status they held before the emails.
The agency’s notice says the court found the emails had no legal effect. Under that order, DHS could not use them as a basis to deny applications, decide admissibility or detention, or calculate unlawful presence under INA § 212(a)(9)(B) and (C)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(B) and (C)(i).
On April 21, 2026, government databases were updated to restore class members’ parole periods, and new termination notices went out. The court found on July 15 that further notice and remedies were needed for effects on members’ immigration matters. Its September order required the no-fee reconsideration process, along with related database, notice and immigration-court remedies.
The court’s reasoning, as described in its proceedings, focused on process. Judge Burroughs found DHS had not documented a prior decision by an authorized official that parole’s humanitarian or public-benefit purpose had ended. The ruling did not hold that parole can never be terminated in a group.
A motion does not guarantee restored status or approval
The September order did not invalidate the April 21 termination notices or require successful benefits to be backdated. A granted motion may therefore leave an applicant without a retroactive approval date. If an applicant is in removal proceedings and the agency no longer has jurisdiction over the application, the request may be rejected or dismissed; an asylum applicant in immigration court may first need to raise jurisdiction with the immigration judge.
The parties also disputed how the March order would be carried out. After plaintiffs sought enforcement, Assistant U.S. Attorney Shawna Yen wrote in an April 7, 2026, email that the government would exclude people whose parole would naturally have expired and those who had since become lawful permanent residents, U.S. citizens or been granted asylum. Plaintiffs’ counsel Allyson R. Scher of Democracy Forward Foundation filed a supporting declaration.
A plaintiffs’ filing said an April 21 memorandum, which the defendants had not made available, would guide future mass re-terminations for the class. The case remains active, and the court may issue further implementation orders.
Applicants should preserve the records tied to their class status and follow the current form instructions before sending a request. Fees and processing times can change; verify current requirements at the agency’s website.
