• 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 Issues good case

Matter of D-M-C-P, 26 I&N Dec. 644 (BIA 2015)

(1) Neither an Immigration Judge nor the Board of Immigration Appeals has jurisdiction to consider whether asylum-only proceedings were improvidently instituted pursuant to a referral under the Visa Waiver Program.

(2) It is improper to deem an application for relief abandoned based on the applicant’s failure to comply with the biometrics filing requirement where the record does not reflect that the applicant received notification advisories concerning that requirement, was given a deadline for submitting the biometrics, and was advised of the consequences of his or her failure to comply.

Seems the Immigration Judge might have been predisposed to rule against applicant

The First Circuit vacated the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order denying the petitioner’s asylum claim and remanded for reconsideration of the credibility determination, finding that purported omissions and discrepancies upon which the Immigration Judge based an adverse credibility determination were consistently present in the record.

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)

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)

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)

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.

BIA expressly retains jurisdiction and qualifies or limits the scope of the remand to a specific purpose

As a matter of first impression, the court held that the IJ’s jurisdiction on remand from the BIA is limited only when the BIA expressly retains jurisdiction and qualifies or limits the scope of the remand to a specific purpose. (Fernandes v. Holder, 8/20/10)

%d bloggers like this: