Cancellation of Removal for Green Card Holders: The 7-5-1 Rule Explained (2026)

Cancellation of removal for a lawful permanent resident (LPR) is a defense in immigration court that lets a judge stop your deportation and keep your green card. Lawyers call the test the "7-5-1 rule": at least 5 years as a green card holder, at least 7 years of continuous residence after being admitted in any status, and no aggravated felony conviction. If you meet all three and the judge decides you deserve it, your case ends and you remain a permanent resident.

Most cases are won or lost on the details. The seven-year clock can stop years earlier than you expect because of the date an offense was committed, not the date of conviction, and a state crime that looks minor can be an "aggravated felony" under federal law. This guide explains each requirement as of October 2026, with the statute and cases that control it.

The relief comes from section 240A(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1229b(a). It is different from cancellation for people without green cards, which requires 10 years of presence and hardship to a qualifying relative. For that version, read our guide to cancellation of removal and the 10-year rule.

What Is Cancellation of Removal for Green Card Holders?

A green card is permanent, but not unconditional. After certain convictions, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can serve you with a Notice to Appear (NTA) and ask an immigration judge to order you removed. Many permanent residents learn about this when ICE detains them after a criminal case closes. If that just happened, start with your first 5 steps after receiving a Notice to Appear.

INA 240A(a) says the Attorney General "may cancel removal" of a permanent resident who is inadmissible or deportable if three conditions are met. In practice, an immigration judge decides. You can only apply in court, not with USCIS.

A grant has two steps. First, you must prove statutory eligibility under the 7-5-1 test. Second, you must show that you deserve relief as a matter of discretion. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) set out both steps in Matter of C-V-T-, 22 I&N Dec. 7 (BIA 1998). If the judge grants your application, the removal case ends and you keep your permanent residence.

Requirement One: Five Years as a Lawful Permanent Resident

INA 240A(a)(1) requires that you have been "lawfully admitted for permanent residence for not less than 5 years." This is usually counted from the "resident since" date on your green card. Conditional residents are lawful permanent residents, so time on a two-year conditional green card generally counts.

The word "lawfully" matters. In Matter of Koloamatangi, 23 I&N Dec. 548 (BIA 2003), the BIA held that a person who obtained permanent residence through fraud or misrepresentation was never "lawfully admitted for permanent residence" and cannot qualify. If DHS claims your green card was obtained improperly, that issue comes first.

Permanent resident status ends when a final administrative order of removal is entered (8 CFR 1001.1(p)), so the five years must be complete before any final order. Unlike the seven-year requirement, the five-year requirement is not cut off by the stop-time rule, so time can keep accruing while your case is pending.

Requirement Two: Seven Years of Continuous Residence After Any Admission

INA 240A(a)(2) requires that you have "resided in the United States continuously for 7 years after having been admitted in any status." Two phrases decide many cases.

The first is "in any status." The seven years does not have to be as a green card holder. In Matter of Blancas-Lara, 23 I&N Dec. 458 (BIA 2002), the respondent had been a resident for only about 6 years and 8 months when his clock stopped, but he had first been admitted years earlier with a border crossing card. The BIA held that residence after admission as a nonimmigrant can count. If you came in on a tourist or student visa and later got your green card, your seven years may start on that first admission.

The second is "admitted." Under INA 101(a)(13)(A), admission means a lawful entry after inspection and authorization by an immigration officer, and INA 101(a)(13)(B) says a person who is paroled is not "admitted." Time after entering without inspection, or on parole alone, generally does not start the clock. For someone who entered without inspection and later adjusted status, the seven years is usually measured from the date of becoming a resident, which makes the stop-time rule especially dangerous.

The Stop-Time Rule: When Your Seven-Year Clock Ends

Under INA 240A(d)(1), continuous residence is "deemed to end" at the earliest of two events.

Service of a proper Notice to Appear. In Pereira v. Sessions, 585 U.S. 198 (2018), the Supreme Court held that a notice that does not state the time or place of the hearing does not stop the clock. In Niz-Chavez v. Garland, 593 U.S. 155 (2021), the Court added that the required information must be in a single document; the government cannot fix a defective NTA by later mailing the missing details. The Third Circuit, which covers Pennsylvania, held in Guadalupe v. Attorney General, 951 F.3d 161 (3d Cir. 2020), that a later Notice of Hearing cannot cure a defective NTA. If your NTA said "to be set" instead of a date, your clock may have kept running. See our post on NTA defects under Pereira and Niz-Chavez.

Commission of certain offenses. The clock also stops when you have "committed an offense referred to in section 212(a)(2)" that renders you inadmissible under section 212(a)(2) or removable under section 237(a)(2) or 237(a)(4). Section 212(a)(2) covers crimes involving moral turpitude, controlled substance offenses, and other criminal grounds.

The key word is "committed." In Barton v. Barr, 590 U.S. 222 (2020), a permanent resident committed offenses within his first seven years and was convicted later. The Supreme Court held that an offense committed during the first seven years stops the clock as of the date it was committed, even if the conviction comes later, as long as the conviction renders the person inadmissible, and that the offense does not need to be one of the charges in the removal case. An old offense DHS never charged can still end your eligibility.

For example, suppose you entered on a student visa in March 2016, became a resident in 2019, committed a theft offense in 2022, and were convicted in 2023. If that offense is one "referred to in section 212(a)(2)," your clock stopped in 2022, at about six years, and you are ineligible.

There is an important exception. In Matter of Garcia, 25 I&N Dec. 332 (BIA 2010), the BIA held that a single crime involving moral turpitude that qualifies for the "petty offense" exception does not trigger the stop-time rule, even if it makes the person deportable. That exception, in INA 212(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II), generally applies when it is your only such crime, the maximum possible penalty did not exceed one year, and you were not sentenced to more than six months of imprisonment, counting any suspended time.

Green card holder facing removal over a criminal case?

We map your admission dates, the date of every offense, and your NTA against the 7-5-1 rule before your next hearing. Consultations by phone or Google Meet. Hablamos español.

Schedule a Consultation

Or call (484) 763-4984

Requirement Three: No Aggravated Felony Conviction

INA 240A(a)(3) bars anyone who "has been convicted of any aggravated felony." "Aggravated felony" is a federal immigration term defined in INA 101(a)(43). It does not depend on whether your state called the crime a felony or a misdemeanor.

The list includes, among other things, illicit trafficking in a controlled substance; a crime of violence for which the term of imprisonment is at least one year; and a theft offense, including receipt of stolen property, or burglary offense for which the term of imprisonment is at least one year. Under INA 101(a)(48)(B), a "term of imprisonment" includes a suspended sentence, so a one-year suspended sentence for theft can count.

Courts use the "categorical approach." The judge looks at the elements of the state statute, not at what you actually did, and asks whether the least serious conduct it covers fits the federal definition. In Moncrieffe v. Holder, 569 U.S. 184 (2013), the Supreme Court held that a marijuana distribution conviction that does not establish payment or more than a small amount is not an aggravated felony. In Lopez v. Gonzales, 549 U.S. 47 (2006), it held that a state drug offense counts as a "felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act" only if the conduct is a federal felony. When a statute lists alternative elements, courts may review a limited set of records, such as the charging document and plea, to see which version you were convicted of.

"Conviction" has its own definition. Under INA 101(a)(48)(A), it includes cases where adjudication was withheld if you pleaded guilty or admitted sufficient facts and the judge ordered some punishment or restraint. For more on this term, see our article on aggravated felony and particularly serious crime bars.

Discretion: How an Immigration Judge Weighs Your Case

Meeting the 7-5-1 test makes you eligible; it does not guarantee a grant. In Matter of C-V-T-, the BIA adopted the discretionary standards of Matter of Marin, 16 I&N Dec. 581 (BIA 1978), developed under former section 212(c).

Favorable factors include family ties in the United States; long residence, especially if it began at a young age; hardship to you and your family; military service; employment history; property or business ties; community service; genuine rehabilitation; and other evidence of good character. Negative factors include the nature of the removal ground, other immigration violations, the nature, recency, and seriousness of any criminal record, and other evidence of bad character.

The BIA said the minimum equities may be enough in some cases, but as negative factors grow more serious, you must offset them with more favorable evidence, which in some cases may need to be "unusual or outstanding equities." A person with a criminal record will ordinarily need to show rehabilitation. INA 240(c)(4) and 8 CFR 1240.8(d) place the burden on you to prove both eligibility and that relief should be granted. Strong cases usually include tax returns, employer and community letters, proof of family relationships, medical or school records, treatment certificates, and honest testimony that takes responsibility.

Filing Form EOIR-42A: Fees, Biometrics, and Other Bars

You apply on Form EOIR-42A, Application for Cancellation of Removal for Certain Permanent Residents, filed with the immigration court that has your case (8 CFR 1240.20). As of October 2026, the fee is $730: a $100 EOIR fee plus a $630 fee created by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (Public Law 119-21). That amount took effect October 1, 2026 under EOIR's annual inflation adjustment, 91 Fed. Reg. 54211 (Aug. 21, 2026); it was $710 before. Biometrics fees are separate, and an immigration judge may waive the application fee on a showing that you cannot pay. See our article on EOIR court fees effective October 1, 2026.

Paying the fee through EOIR's payment portal is not filing; the application still goes to the court with proof of payment. You must also complete DHS biometrics. Under 8 CFR 1003.47, the judge cannot grant relief until background checks are complete, and failing to complete biometrics in the time allowed counts as abandonment of your application unless you show good cause.

Check the other bars in INA 240A(c). Paragraph (c)(6) makes you ineligible if you previously received cancellation of removal, suspension of deportation, or a waiver under former section 212(c), so this is one-time relief. Paragraph (c)(4) bars people inadmissible under the security grounds of section 212(a)(3) or deportable under section 237(a)(4), and paragraph (c)(5) bars persecutors described in section 241(b)(3)(B)(i).

The annual cap of 4,000 grants in INA 240A(e) does not apply to LPR cancellation. The implementing regulation, 8 CFR 1240.21, applies the cap to suspension of deportation and to cancellation under section 240A(b), for nonpermanent residents.

What This Means in the Lehigh Valley

If you live in Allentown, Bethlehem, Easton, or elsewhere in eastern Pennsylvania, your case will most likely be heard at the Philadelphia Immigration Court, 900 Market Street, Suite 504, Philadelphia. At your first master calendar hearing you tell the judge you are seeking cancellation and receive a deadline to file the EOIR-42A. Our guide to the master calendar hearing in Philadelphia Immigration Court explains what to expect. An immigration judge's decision is appealed first to the Board of Immigration Appeals, and a petition for review of a case decided in Philadelphia then goes to the Third Circuit, so Third Circuit decisions control how Pennsylvania convictions are analyzed in those cases.

Three Pennsylvania fact patterns come up often. The first is drug possession. INA 237(a)(2)(B)(i) exempts from deportability a single offense of possession for your own use of 30 grams or less of marijuana, but that exception is written into the deportability ground. The inadmissibility ground in section 212(a)(2), which drives the stop-time rule, does not contain the same language, so even a small possession case can affect your seven-year clock depending on when it was committed. The second is retail theft. A theft conviction may be a crime involving moral turpitude that stops the clock, and it can be an aggravated felony if the term of imprisonment is at least one year, including suspended time. The third is diversion. Programs such as Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) may or may not produce a "conviction" for immigration purposes depending on what was entered and ordered.

The practical step is the same in every case: get certified copies of the complaint, information, plea or verdict, and sentencing order from the county Court of Common Pleas or magisterial district court, and have an immigration lawyer review them before you concede anything in court. Our removal defense practice in the Lehigh Valley starts every LPR cancellation case with that record review.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the 7-5-1 rule for cancellation of removal?

It is shorthand for the three eligibility requirements in INA 240A(a): at least 5 years as a lawful permanent resident, at least 7 years of continuous residence in the United States after being admitted in any status, and no conviction for an aggravated felony. You must also show that you deserve relief as a matter of discretion.

Can a green card holder with a criminal record get cancellation of removal?

Yes, in many cases. A criminal record does not automatically disqualify you unless the conviction is an aggravated felony, an offense committed before you reached seven years stopped your clock under the stop-time rule, or another bar in INA 240A(c) applies. The judge will weigh the record against your family ties, work history, rehabilitation, and other equities.

Does the 7 years for LPR cancellation have to be as a green card holder?

No. The statute requires 7 years of continuous residence after being admitted in any status. In Matter of Blancas-Lara, the BIA held that time after admission as a nonimmigrant, such as on a visa or border crossing card, can count. Time after entering without inspection or on parole alone generally does not count.

How much does Form EOIR-42A cost in 2026?

As of October 1, 2026, the fee for Form EOIR-42A is $730, which includes a $100 EOIR fee and a $630 fee created by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Biometrics fees are separate, and an immigration judge may waive the application fee if you show you cannot pay.

Can you get cancellation of removal twice?

No. Under INA 240A(c)(6), you are not eligible if you previously received cancellation of removal, suspension of deportation, or a waiver under former section 212(c). LPR cancellation is a one-time form of relief.

Get Help With Cancellation of Removal for Permanent Residents

LPR cancellation cases turn on dates and documents: when you were first admitted, when each offense was committed, what your NTA said, and the exact statute and sentence on each conviction. A careful review before your first hearing shows whether you qualify, whether a defective NTA kept your clock running, or whether another defense is stronger.

Lehigh Valley Immigration Law represents permanent residents in removal proceedings across Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York. Schedule a consultation or call (484) 763-4984. We meet by phone or Google Meet, in English or Spanish.

This article is general information, not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws and agency policies change; confirm current rules before acting.