• Hours & Info

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

  • Past Blog Posts

BIA Dismisses Respondent’s Appeal and Discusses §18.5 of the California Penal Code

The BIA found that the amendment to §18.5 of the California Penal Code, which retroactively lowered the maximum possible sentence that could have been imposed for a foreign national’s state offense from 365 days to 364 days, does not affect the applicability of INA §237(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) to a past conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude “for which a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed.”

BIA Distinguishes Pereira and Dismisses Respondent’s Appeal

The BIA found that a notice to appear that doesn’t specify the time and place of an individual’s initial removal hearing vests an immigration judge with jurisdiction over the removal proceedings and meets the requirements of INA §239(a), so long as a notice of hearing specifying this information is later sent to the individual.

Court Holds BIA’s Interpretation of Physical Presence Requirement for NACARA Cancellation to Be Reasonable

The Ninth Circuit held that the BIA’s interpretation of the 10-year physical presence requirement for NACARA cancellation of removal for applicants inadmissible on certain criminal grounds as running from the most recent disqualifying conviction was reasonable.1:39 AM

BIA Finds Wisconsin Prostitution Statute Is Categorically an Aggravated Felony

The BIA sustained DHS’s appeal and reinstated removal proceedings, after finding that INA §101(a)(43)(K)(i) encompassed offenses related to the operation of a business that involves engaging in, or agreeing to engage in, sexual conduct for anything of value.

Court Upholds BIA’s Determination That Petitioner Entered into Fraudulent Marriage to Procure Adjustment of Status

The Eighth Circuit denied the petition for review, holding that the BIA’s determination that the petitioner attempted to procure an adjustment of status by willfully misrepresenting that his marriage to a U.S. citizen was bona fide was supported by substantial evidence that the marriage was a sham. The court found that the unrefuted testimony and documentary evidence submitted by DHS was sufficient to prove that the marriage was fraudulent under INA §212(a)(6)(C)(i), and therefore that the petitioner was removable pursuant to INA §237(a)(1)(A).

BIA Remands to Determine If Beneficiary’s Birth Certificate Is Sufficient

In a precedent decision issued on September 20, 2017, the BIA held that 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.

BIA Clarifies Standard for Determining When a Misrepresentation Is “Material” Under INA §212(a)(6)(C)(i)

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.

%d bloggers like this: