• 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

The Ninth Circuit granted the petition for review, holding that the petitioner was entitled to equitable tolling of his untimely motion to reopen, because his lawyer’s advice to pursue a form of immigration relief for which the petitioner was statutorily ineligible constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. The court remanded to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) with instructions to grant the petitioner’s motion to reopen

BIA rules on adverse credibility findings based on fraudulent documents

Board of immigration appeals

Motion to reopen with the BIA

BIA issues two crime related decisions

Matter of D-M-C-P, 26 I&N Dec. 644 (BIA 2015)

(1) Neither an Immigration Judge nor the Board of Immigration Appeals has jurisdiction to consider whether asylum-only proceedings were improvidently instituted pursuant to a referral under the Visa Waiver Program.

(2) It is improper to deem an application for relief abandoned based on the applicant’s failure to comply with the biometrics filing requirement where the record does not reflect that the applicant received notification advisories concerning that requirement, was given a deadline for submitting the biometrics, and was advised of the consequences of his or her failure to comply.

BIA rules on expert testimony and factual findings

BIA pro bono project

Board of immigration appeals

BIA issues two crime related decisions

EOIR issued an interim rule with a request for comments amending the DOJ regulations relating to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) by adding two Board member positions, expanding the BIA to 17 members. This rule is effective today. Comments must be submitted by August 3, 2015.

BIA

Board of immigration appeals

Appeal to BIA

BIA Deference given to particulary serious crime

In a precedent decision issued yesterday, the BIA held that a respondent who has voted in an election involving candidates for federal office in violation of 18 USC §611(a) is removable under section 237(a)(6)(A) of the INA, regardless of whether the respondent knew that he or she was committing an unlawful act by voting. The BIA reasoned that because the respondent, an LPR who had disclosed during a naturalization interview that she had voted in an election in 2006 that included a local school board race, had intentionally voted in an election involving candidates for federal office, the general intent requirement of §611(a) was satisfied.

BIA

Board of immigration appeals

Appeal to BIA

BIA deference given to particulary serious crime

 

 

 

In a precedent decision issued today, the BIA held that a respondent who adjusted status inside the U.S., and who did not enter as an LPR, is not barred from establishing eligibility for a waiver of inadmissibility under INA §212(h). In so doing, the BIA withdrew from its previous decisions on the topic, aligning its holding with that of nine circuit courts who have held that the plain language of §212(h) precludes immigrants from establishing eligibility for relief only if they lawfully entered the U.S. as permanent residents and thereafter committed a removable offense for which a waiver is required.

Appeal to BIA

BIA

Board of immigration appeals

Bia deference given to particulary serious crime

Court Defers to BIA’s Interpretation of Good Moral Character Requirements

The Fifth Circuit held that the BIA did not err in concluding that a petitioner cannot establish good moral character if he has been incarcerated for 180 days or more, regardless of the nature of the underlying crime of conviction. The court also upheld the BIA’s interpretation that INA §240A(b)(1) requires the petitioner to establish good moral character during the 10 years immediately preceding the final administrative decision of the IJ or BIA on the petitioner’s application, as opposed to the 10 years preceding service of the NTA.

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

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

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

https://californiaimmigration.us/eoir-rescinds-policy-memo-on-case-processing-at-the-bia/

BIA Holds Hague Convention Does Not Apply to LPR Petitioning for Adopted Child

In an unpublished decision, the BIA sustained the appeal and remanded, concluding that when a Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) petitioner and a U.S. citizen spouse adopt a child together, they may choose either to pursue a Hague Convention adoption route or to pursue the Form 1-130 route through the LPR spouse. The BIA noted that the regulations do not require an LPR adoptive parent to pursue a Convention adoption, even if that LPR is married to a U.S. citizen.

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

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

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

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

BIA decision

The Sixth Circuit reversed the BIA’s holding that the petitioner was bound to the concession of removability made by his prior attorney, reversed the IJ’s finding that the petitioner was removable, and remanded for the BIA to decide whether the offense of felonious assault under Michigan law is a crime involving moral turpitude.

Appeal to BIA

Board of immigration appeals

The court reversed the decision of the IJ and BIA

BIA rules in withholding of removal

The court reversed the decision of the IJ and BIA

http://www.californiaimmigration.us
The court reversed the decision of the IJ and BIA, holding that a conviction does not attain a sufficient degree of finality for immigration purposes until direct appellate review of the conviction has been exhausted or waived.

BIA 

Board of immigration appeals

Immigration Lawyer near me

Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner 

 

 

 

 

Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) and IIRIRA.

The BIA found that the Supreme Court precedent in Vartelas v. Holder allowed for the IJ to consider 212(c) relief since the respondent’s sole conviction pre-dated the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) and IIRIRA. http://ow.ly/sx6uJ

Terrorism

BIA 

Board of immigration appeals

BIA cases