Shade Lawal, a Nigerian citizen and lawful permanent resident, was placed in removal proceedings after Georgia convictions for theft and employment-insurance fraud. The Board of Immigration Appeals agreed that his convictions did not make him categorically ineligible for an INA section 212(h) waiver, but dismissed his appeal because he had not simultaneously filed an application for adjustment of status. Lawal argued that older Board precedent allowed an eligible permanent resident who had departed and lawfully returned to seek the waiver without that filing. The Eleventh Circuit identified an unresolved conflict among the Board’s current interpretation, its earlier Sanchez decision, the immigration statutes, and intervening circuit precedent. It held that the Board had not adequately addressed whether Sanchez remained valid or how it applied to a permanent resident treated as seeking admission after returning from abroad. The court also directed the Board to reconsider its separate comparable-grounds ruling in light of the Supreme Court’s decision rejecting that rule as arbitrary and capricious. Rather than decide Lawal’s waiver eligibility, the court vacated the Board’s decision and remanded for agency analysis in the first instance. The opinion therefore clarified the questions that controlled the remand without resolving the ultimate immigration result.