• 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

A case just came down with the following ruling:
Matter of Y-S-L-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2015)

(1) The requirements of the Federal Rules of Evidence with respect to the admission of expert testimony are inapposite to a respondent’s testimony regarding events of which he or she has personal knowledge.

(2) Conduct by an Immigration Judge that can be perceived as bullying or hostile is never appropriate, particularly in cases involving minor respondents, and may result in remand to a different Immigration Judge.

Immigration judges

23 new immigration judges

Some immigration judges were hired without any Immigration Law experience

The attorney general disciplines the Immigration judges

Immigration Judges hard at work

A recent Transactional Records Access Clearing House (TRAC) report found that Immigration Judges completed 198,105 cases during FY2015, up 7.3% from 184,597 in FY2014. The data indicated that this marks the first time in six years that immigration court case closings have risen rather than fallen, halting a downward slide that had been observed since FY2009.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/23-new-immigration-judges/

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

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/immigration-judges/

https://californiaimmigration.us/immigration-judges-to-be-held-more-accountable/

Petitioner’s Ignorance of Christian Doctrine

The court reversed the adverse credibility finding as improperly based on the IJ’s perception of Petitioner’s ignorance of Christian doctrine, misstatements that did not go to the heart of the claim, and insufficient evidence of evasiveness. (Li v. Holder, 1/19/11)

“Derivative Citizenship” under former INA §321(a)

The court held that for purposes of derivative citizenship under former INA §321(a), the phrase “begins to reside permanently in the United States while under the age of 18 years” requires the status of a lawful permanent resident. (U.S. v. Forey-Quintero, 11/30/10)

Case involving separate claims of a couple from Egypt

In a case involving separate claims of a couple from Egypt, the court upheld the IJ’s adverse credibility determination as to the husband, but remanded the wife’s claim where the BIA failed to address the IJ’s findings as to her testimony. (Rizk v. Holder, 1/3/11)

BIA

denial of bia

immigration attorney

BIA Issues Two Crime Related Decisions

The court dismissed Petitioner’s claim as administratively unexhausted

The court dismissed Petitioner’s claim as administratively unexhausted, but implored its colleagues that when a similar case is next presented, to hold that slight tardiness to one’s hearing does not qualify as a failure to appear. (Camaj v. Holder, 11/8/10)

Failure to Appear

Immigration Attorney

inland empire immigration attorney

BIA Remands Case Where Defendant Appeals In Absentia Order

Source of the children’s support in the event of Petitioner’s deportation

The court remanded where the IJ and BIA assumed that the father of Petitioner’s children would remain a source of the children’s support in the event of Petitioner’s deportation, and ignored the possibility of the father’s deportation. (Champion v. Holder, 11/22/10)

USC Father

BIA

bia board of immigration appeals

Victory for Due Process of Aliens

EOIR announces on the new six Immigration Judges

EOIR announcement on the appointment of six new immigration judges who will preside in immigration courts in Eloy, AZ, Lumpkin, GA, Memphis, TN, and Port Isabel and San Antonio, TX.

32 individuals from the Atlanta area were arrested by Fugitive Operations Teams

ICE announcement that 32 individuals from the Atlanta area were arrested by Fugitive Operations Teams (FOT). Those arrested include individuals with prior criminal convictions, prior deportations, or outstanding final orders of deportation issued by an immigration judge.

Post-conclusion Voluntary Departure

An alien is not precluded from post-conclusion voluntary departure under INA §240B(b)(1), where the request is raised for the first time after IJ issuance of the removal order, but prior to the conclusion of the hearing.