• 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

BIA Rules IJ Should Enter In Absentia Order of Removal if Individual Returned to Mexico Under MPP Fails to Appear for Hearing

In Matter of Rodriguez, the BIA ruled that if DHS returns an individual to Mexico to await an immigration hearing pursuant to the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) and provides sufficient notice of that hearing, an immigration judge should enter an in absentia order of removal if the individual fails to appear for the hearing. Visit our featured issue page for more information on the MPP and tent courts.

BIA

BIA meaning

Appeal to BIA

BIA deference given to particulary serious crime

The BIA held in a precedent decision issued

In a case before the BIA on remand from the Ninth Circuit for further clarification of portions of the agency’s April 2011 decision in Matter of D-R-, the BIA held in a precedent decision issued today that a misrepresentation is material under INA §212(a)(6)(C)(i) when it tends to shut off a line of inquiry that is relevant to a non citizen’s admissibility and that would predictably have disclosed other facts relevant to eligibility for a visa, other documentation, or admission to the United States. The BIA further held that in determining whether a noncitizen assisted or otherwise participated in extrajudicial killing, an adjudicator should consider (1) the nexus between the noncitizen’s role, acts, or inaction and the extrajudicial killing and (2) scienter, meaning his or her prior or contemporaneous knowledge of the killing.

BIA rules on expert testimony and factual findings

Board of immigration appeals

Motion to reopen with the BIA

BIA remands case back to USCIS

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/

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

AG Lifts Stay and Remands Matter of Chairez and Matter of Sama

After referring Matter of Chairez and Matter of Sama to herself for review of an issue relating to Descamps v. United States, and after inviting amicus briefs addressing the proper approach for determining “divisibility” within the meaning of Descamps, the Attorney General (AG) lifted the stay and remanded the two cases to the BIA for any appropriate action in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 23, 2016, decision in Mathis v. United States.

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

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

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

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

BIA´s decision

The Second Circuit held that the BIA’s decision declining to certify the petitioner’s untimely appeal of his removal order was a discretionary determination and, accordingly, was not subject to judicial review.

Board of immigration appeals

The IJ and BIA

BIA Pro Bono project

The Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner