The Eighth Circuit denied the petition for review, holding that a failure to satisfy the warning requirements of 8 CFR §240.25 does not preclude a finding of voluntary departure under threat of deportation sufficient to break the 10-year period of continuous presence required to be eligible for cancellation of removal. The court thus found that the petitioner was not eligible for cancellation of removal under INA §240A(b), because he voluntary departed the United States under a threat of deportation in March 2001, thus breaking his continuous presence in the country.
Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: Cancellation of Removal, Deportation, Immigration Court |

Leave a comment