• 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 Finds LPR Who Adjusts Status in U.S. Is Not Barred from §212(h) Waiver

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.

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 Remands to Consider Whether Misprision of Felony Is a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude

The Second Circuit held that the BIA should determine on remand whether it still adheres to the position that concealment of a felony qualifies as a “crime involving moral turpitude.” If so, the BIA should determine whether its position can be applied retroactively to the petitioner’s case.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/aggrvated-felony/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/aggravated-felony/

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

https://californiaimmigration.us/california-penal-code-regarding-unlawful-sexual-intercourse-with-a-minor-compares-the-similar-charges-of-aggravated-felony/

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/

Court Grants Petition for Review for Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claim

The Seventh Circuit remanded, holding that the BIA abused its discretion by ignoring a potentially meritorious argument when deciding on the motion to reopen, and that the BIA should determine if the petitioner’s attorneys incompetently neglected to offer evidence and arguments that might have resolved the inconsistencies identified by the Immigration Judge.

The BIA found the respondent eligible for asylum

The BIA found the respondent eligible for asylum, noting the compelling reasons respondent is unwilling to return to Senegal based on past female genital mutilation (FGM) irrespective of whether she has a well-founded fear of future persecution.

http://ow.ly/sx2MI

BIA, asylum and immigration

Asylum application

MTR 

Asylum cases

The BIA Overturned! The evidence was not

The BIA Overturned! The evidence was not properly considered http://ow.ly/rPiEQ

Appeal to BIA

Board of immigration appeals

BIA overturned

BIA rules on step child

Can I appeal this horrible decision?

Can I appeal this horrible decision?

Question: I lost at the immigration Court level. Can I appeal?

Answer: Yes, you can appeal. You can appeal it to the Board of Immigration Appeals in Virginia.

Question: When do I appeal and what happens if I don’t appeal on time?

Answer: You must appeal to the BIA within the 30 days after the decision by the Immigration Judge. That means that the Notice of Appeal must be physically at the Board of Immigration Appeals by the deadline. If it is 5 minutes late, it will be rejected and returned. Your appeal will be over and you will likely have a deportation order and be physically deported from the United States. Clearly, it would be in your interest to make sure the Notice of Appeal is timely filed.

Question: What happens if I just found out about doing the appeal and it is due tomorrow and I can’t even have time to send it to Virginia on time?

Answer: There is actually a company in Virginia that you can send the Notice of Appeal up until 10:00 a.m the day that it is due. They will then physically go to the Board of Immigration Appeals and file the Notice of Appeal. It is not cheap, but it saves the appeal at the last minute. It is well worth the price if you are in that unfortunate situation.

Question: Do I have to do the Opening Brief when I send in the Notice of Appeal?

Answer: No. You will get a notice from the BIA as to when it is due. You will have considerable time to have it properly prepared and to develop your arguments and to make your case. Once the Opening Brief is submitted, you will then receive the reply brief from the Government. They will argue as to why the appeal should be denied and why the Government made the correct decision. Afterwards, you will have about 14 days to submit the reasons you believe the reply brief is incorrect and what points need to be made. Afterwards, the BIA will make a decision on your case.

Question: Should I have an attorney help me?

Answer: It would most definitely be in your best interest. Appeals are won and lost on the legal points that are made. They are not won by simply rehashing the facts. If you want any real chance of winning, you should not only hire an attorney, but one that specialized in Immigration Laws, has years of experience doing appeals and knows the immigration laws backwards and forwards.

https://atomic-temporary-10880024.wpcomstaging.com/tag/9th-circuit-court-of-appeals/

https://atomic-temporary-10880024.wpcomstaging.com/tag/appeal/

https://atomic-temporary-10880024.wpcomstaging.com/tag/administrative-appeals-office-aao-2/

https://californiaimmigration.us/dont-give-up-do-a-petition-for-review-to-the-ninth-circuit-court-of-appeal/

Board of Immigration Appeals decision

Where petitioners sought review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision denying their motion to reopen their removal proceedings, and some of the evidence they submitted was cumulative of evidence they had submitted during their hearing, while some was not, Court of Appeals had jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision to the extent that it pertained to the noncumulative evidence, but lacked jurisdiction to review the decision as it pertained to the cumulative evidence, except to the extent that the petitioners raised a question of law regarding the treatment of that evidence. BIA did not abuse its discretion in concluding that petitioners’ daughter’s new medical condition, which allegedly required reconstructive surgery for a disfigurement on her external ear, did not warrant reopening, but BIA erred where it failed to exercise its discretion to consider or decline to consider petitioners’ supplemental brief and an attached exhibit relating to a new, allegedly precancerous medical condition allegedly incurred by one petitioner’s mother.

BIA 

Board of immigration appeals

BIA meaning

Lawyer to appeal to the BIA

Board of Immigration Appeals might have jurisdiction over his claim

Ninth Circuit decisions and those of other circuits provided petitioner, who claimed that ineffective assistance of counsel occurred after a final order of removal had been entered, with fair notice and the ability to anticipate that the Board of Immigration Appeals might have jurisdiction over his claim. District court did not err in dismissing habeas corpus petition for failure to satisfy prudential requirement that petitioner exhaust administrative remedies. Singh v. Napolitano – filed August 23, 2010

BIA Just a stepping stone 

BIA appealing 

The BIA ruling 

BIA decisions