• Hours & Info

    (562) 495-0554
    M-F: 8:00am - 6:00 p.m.
    Sat: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
  • Past Blog Posts

  • https://api.whatsapp.com/send?phone=13104885414

Matter of REHMAN, 27 I&N Dec. 124 (BIA 2017)

Where a petitioner seeking to prove a familial relationship submits a birth certificate that was not registered contemporaneously with the birth, an adjudicator must consider the birth certificate, as well as all the other evidence of record and the circumstances of the case, to determine whether the petitioner has submitted sufficient reliable evidence to demonstrate the claimed relationship by a preponderance of the evidence.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia-2/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia-board-of-immigration-appeals/

https://californiaimmigration.us/bia-deference-given-to-particulary-serious-crime/

What to do if you lose at the Board of Immigration Appeals

Question: I am so sad. I lost at the Immigration Court and then I lost at the Board of Immigration Appeals. Is there anywhere else to go and anything else I can do to try to stay here in the U.S.?

Answer: Yes. You are eligible to file a Petition for Review to the Circuit Court of Appeals.  Petitions for review must be filed and received by the court no later than 30 days after
the date of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) or the U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This deadline is jurisdictiona.  The 30-day deadline for filing a petition for review is not extended either by filing a motion to reopen or reconsider or by the grant or extension of voluntary departure. Separate petitions for review must be filed for each BIA decision, including issues arising from the denial of a motion to reopen or reconsider.


ICE can deport an individual before the 30-day deadline to file a petition for review
Filing a petition for review does not stay the individual’s removal from the country; Instead, a separate request for a stay must be filed with the court. Filing a petition for review terminates the voluntary departure order, with one exception.  A petition for review may be litigated even if the individual has been removed. However, you probably want to stay here, so try to get the Motion to Stay promptly filed.

Question: That’s good to hear. However, what exactly is a ‘petition for review’?

Answer: A petition for review is the document filed by, or on behalf of, an individual seeking review of an agency decision in a circuit court of appeals. In the immigration context, a petition for review is filed to obtain federal court review of a removal, deportation or exclusion decision issued by the BIA. In addition, a petition for review may be filed to obtain review of a removal order issued by ICE under a few very limited specific provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

Question: So what can you challenge in the Petition for Review?

Answer: A challenge to a BIA or ICE decision may involve legal, constitutional, factual, and/or
discretionary claims. In general, (1) legal claims assert that BIA/ICE erroneously applied or
interpreted the law (e.g., the INA or the regulations); (2) constitutional challenges assert that
BIA/ICE violated a constitutional right (e.g., due process or equal protection); (3) factual claims
assert that certain findings of fact made by BIA/ICE were erroneous; and (4) discretionary claims assert BIA/ICE abused its discretion by the manner in which it reached its conclusion.

Keep in mind that the 30-day deadline for filing a petition for review of the underlying decision is not extended by the filing of a motion to reopen or reconsider, nor is it extended by the grant or extension of voluntary departure. To obtain review of issues arising from a BIA decision and issues arising from the denial of a motion to reopen or reconsider, separate petitions for review of each BIA decision must be filed.

It is quite complex to properly do a Petition for Review, so be sure that you get a qualified immigration attorney to get it filed for you.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/appeal-to-bia/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia-board-of-immigration-appeals/

https://californiaimmigration.us/bia-deference-given-to-particulary-serious-crime/

Matter of CALCANO DE MILLAN, 26 I&N Dec. 904 (BIA 2017)

For purposes of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109-248, 120 Stat. 587, and section 204(a)(1)(A)(viii)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(1)(A)(viii)(I) (2012), a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident petitioner has been “convicted” of an offense where either a formal judgment of guilt has been entered by a court or, if adjudication of guilt has been withheld, where (1) a plea, finding, or admission of facts established the petitioner’s guilt and (2) a judge ordered some form of punishment, penalty, or restraint on his or her liberty.

BIA procedures

Board of immigration appeals

Appeal to BIA

BIA issues 

Ninth Circuit upholds BIA denial

The Ninth Circuit upheld the BIA’s decision refusing to consider the Peruvian petitioner’s adjustment of status application because he entered the United States using a fraudulent Italian passport to gain the benefits of the Visa Waiver Program (VWP), holding as a matter of first impression that a noncitizen who fraudulently enters the United States under the VWP is subject to the VWP’s limitations, including waiving any challenge to deportation other than asylum. The court also held that the BIA did not err in denying the petitioner’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), finding that the petitioner failed to establish a nexus to a protected ground, and that the harm he suffered was insufficient for CAT protection.

Former Immigration Judges and BIA Members Slam DHS on Immigration Detention System

On October 31, 2016, former Immigration Judges and BIA members sent a letter to DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson to express concern and disappointment regarding the dramatic increase in the numbers of men, women, and children detained by ICE, stating, “On the basis of our experiences as immigration jurists, we know this expansion comes at the expense of basic rights and due process.”

BIA

Appeal to BIA

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA deference given to particulary serious crime

BIA Says Arizona Felony Conviction for Solicitation to Possess Marijuana for Sale Is a CIMT

In a precedent decision issued today, the BIA clarified Matter of Vo, holding that, within the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit, a returning lawful permanent resident (LPR) who has a felony conviction for solicitation to possess marijuana for sale is an arriving alien who is inadmissible under INA §212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) for having committed a crime of moral turpitude (CIMT), even though that section of the INA refers only to attempt and conspiracy to commit a CIMT.
BIA deference given to particulary serious crime

BIA Says Endangering the Welfare of a Child in New York Is Categorically a Crime of Child Abuse

In a precedent decision issued today, the BIA held that the crime of endangering the welfare of a child in violation of §260.10(1) of the New York Penal Law, which requires knowingly acting in a manner likely to be injurious to the physical, mental, or moral welfare of a child, is categorically a “crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment” under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i).

Board of immigration appeals

Appeal to BIA

BIA and immigration

BIA deference given to particulary serious crime

IA Says Probationary Confinement in Substance Abuse Treatment Facility Is “Term of Confinement”

  1. BIA Says Probationary Confinement in Substance Abuse Treatment Facility Is “Term of Confinement”
    In a published decision issued today, the BIA held that a term of confinement in a substance abuse treatment facility imposed as a condition of probation constitutes a “term of confinement” under INA §101(a)(48)(B) for purposes of determining if an offense is a crime of violence under INA §101(a)(43)(F).

BIA meaning

Board of immigration appeals and immigration

Appeal to BIA

A study at columbia Law school concerning human rights and US immigration requested information from Attorneys 

Stop-Time Rule for Cancellation

Today, the BIA issued two precedent decisions addressing the issue of whether evidence that photographs and fingerprints were taken in conjunction with a noncitizen’s voluntary departure or return constitutes a formal, documented process sufficient to break continuous physical presence for purposes of establishing eligibility for cancellation of removal, where the noncitizen had the right to appear before an Immigration Judge but was not informed of that right. In the first decision, the BIA held that such evidence was not sufficient, in the absence of evidence that the noncitizen was informed of and waived the right to a hearing. In the second decision, the BIA found that this rule applies regardless of whether the encounter in which the noncitizen was photographed and fingerprinted occurred at or near the border.

The Board of Immigration Appeals cannot simply ignore the evidence.

The Second Circuit reversed the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) and remanded, finding that it was unable to meaningfully review the agency’s removability determination, because the BIA had failed to consider material evidence—namely, the petitioner’s 1994 marriage certificate. On remand, the BIA was instructed to evaluate the authenticity of the marriage certificate, and to articulate the standard the agency applies when assessing the credibility of an individual who testifies on matters concerning removability in a contested removal proceeding.