• 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

Court Remands to BIA Where Petitioners Incurred Legal Expenses in Reliance on Pre-Briones Law

The Ninth Circuit granted the petition for review and remanded to the BIA, holding that the petitioners could establish a legitimate reliance interest on pre-Briones law by showing that they incurred legal expenses pursuing adjustment of status during the 21-month period between Acosta v. Gonzales and Matter of Briones. Because the record did not reflect the amount of the expenses the petitioners incurred during the relevant period, the court remanded to the BIA with instructions to allow the petitioners to supplement the record, and to assess in the first instance under Garfias-Rodriguez v. Holder whether Briones may be applied retroactively in this case.

Entered illegally after a deportation order AND have a 245(i) application? Which controls?

The Ninth Circuit reversed the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of the petitioner’s adjustment of status application, finding that the petitioner reasonably relied on Acosta v. Gonzales, which was the law of the circuit in effect at the time he applied to adjust status, but which was later overruled by Garfias-Rodriguez v. Holder. The court held that the BIA’s decision in Matter of Briones should not be applied retroactively to bar the petitioner’s application, because the petitioner’s reliance interests and the burden that retroactivity would impose on him outweighed the interest in uniform application of the immigration laws.