• 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 Finds Receipt of Embezzled Property Is Not Categorically an Aggravated Felony

The Fourth Circuit held that the BIA erred in concluding that the petitioner was an aggravated felon who was ineligible for cancellation of removal under INA §240A(a)(3), finding that a conviction for receipt of embezzled property under 18 USC §659 is not an aggravated felony under the categorical approach

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

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

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

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

Circuit Court Finds Exceptional Circumstances Exist to Reopen Petitioner’s Removal Proceedings

The First Circuit concluded that the BIA abused its discretion when it found that the circumstances attendant to the entry of an in absentia removal order against a young undocumented immigrant who was ill-served by two attorneys were not exceptional. Accordingly, the court remanded to the BIA with instructions to set aside the in absentia removal order and reopen the petitioner’s removal proceedings.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/expedited-removal/

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

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/removal-of-the-conditional-residence/

https://californiaimmigration.us/removal/

USCIS Message: Current Form I-9 Valid Until January 21, 2017

I-9 form has changed for employers, but you can continue to use the old I-9 form for a few more months before the new form is in effect.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/form-i-9/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/form-i-9-employment-eligibility-verification-2/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/i-9/

https://californiaimmigration.us/a-los-angeles-immigration-attorney-can-help-with-all-your-immigration-needs/

BALCA Finds PERM Received Two Days After Recruitment Expired Was Timely Submitted

Where recruitment expired on a Saturday but the PERM application filed by mail was not received until Monday, BALCA overturned the Certifying Officer’s denial of the labor certification, finding that sufficient documentation was submitted to prove the date of mailing, and thus that the PERM application was timely filed.

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

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/balca-denial/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/balca-remanded-the-case-for-certification/

https://californiaimmigration.us/balca-affirms-denial-based-on-lack-of-proof-of-job-order/

DHS Adds New TRIG Exemptions

DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson authorized new terrorism-related inadmissibility grounds (TRIG) exemptions covering a number of groups.

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

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/acting-dhs-secretary/

https://californiaimmigration.us/central-american-minor-kids-program-opened/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/department-of-homeland-security-dhs/

Family detention

The Ninth Circuit held that the Flores settlement agreement applies to both minors who are accompanied and unaccompanied by their parents, and that the lower court correctly refused to amend the agreement to accommodate family detention. The court also found that the lower court erred in interpreting the agreement to provide an affirmative right to release for accompanying parents, but did not preclude such release, and explicitly made no determination about whether DHS is making otherwise appropriate and individualized release determinations for parents.

Family detention

Detention

Detained?

Stay in the U.S with your family

False Claim to Citizenship is difficult to get around

(1) A false claim to United States citizenship falls within the scope of section 212(a)(6)(C)(ii)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(ii)(I) (2012), where there is direct or circumstantial evidence that the false claim was made with the subjective intent of obtaining a purpose or benefit under the Act or any other Federal or State law, and where United States citizenship actually affects or matters to the purpose or benefit sought.

(2) There is a distinction between achieving a “purpose” and obtaining a “benefit” under section 212(a)(6)(C)(ii)(I) of the Act.

(3) Avoiding removal proceedings qualifies as a “purpose” within the meaning of section 212(a)(6)(C)(ii)(I) of the Act.

False claim to citizenship

Citizenship application

Derivative citizenship

Victime of crime? Try for the U visa 

Bond Denied

  1. In a precedent decision issued today, the BIA held that, in determining whether a noncitizen presents a danger to the community at large and thus should not be released on bond pending removal proceedings, an IJ should consider both direct and circumstantial evidence of dangerousness, including whether the facts and circumstances present national security considerations. Accordingly, the BIA affirmed the IJ’s denial of the respondent’s request for release on bond, finding that he failed to show that, based on the totality of the facts and circumstances presented, he did not present a danger to the community pursuant to INA §236(a).

Bond meaning

Bond hearing

Bond hearings and immigration

Got dond? Get a LA deportation Attorney

The Petty Offense Exception

Question: I committed a relatively small crime. Am I now not admissible to the U.S.?

Answer: It will depend on what exactly you committed. However, there is what is known as the petty offense exception.

Question: What is the petty offense exemption?

Answer: An alien (whether or not a minor) is not inadmissible if the CIMT is for a petty offense. A conviction (or admission) is considered a petty offense: “if the maximum penalty possible for the crime of which the alien was convicted … did not exceed imprisonment for one year and, if the alien was convicted of such crime, the alien was not sentenced to a term of imprisonment in excess of 6 months (regardless of the extent to which the sentence was ultimately executed).

Question: What if there is an undeterminate probationary period?

Answer: An undesignated probationary sentence, unlike an indeterminate sentence, is not considered a felony punishable by more than one year imprisonment, where the court has designated it a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 6 months.

Question: What if the crime is a ‘wobbler’?

Answer: Cal. Penal Code §487.2 is a “wobbler” statute and where judge designates it as a misdemeanor, the BIA is bound by that determination for purposes of the petty offense exception. You need to look at each particular State.

Question: What if I had a drug conviction?

Answer: Department of State takes the position that the petty offense exception is not applicable to drug cases.

Question: What if I committed or admitted to more than 1 petty offense?

Answer: The petty offense exception is not applicable if more than one CIMT offense has been committed or admitted.

Question: What if I committed more than 1 crime, but only 1 is a CIMT?

Answer: Where there was a second CIMT, the “stop-time” rule applied because the petty offense exception only applies to the first CIMT. However, it remains effective where one of the 2 offenses was not for a CIMT. For example, an applicant who was convicted of a petty offense that was a CIMT and a second offense (battery) that was not a CIMT, he is not barred from cancellation, because he has not been convicted of an offense under §212(a)(2). It also remains effective for purposes of cancellation, where the second CIMT was not committed until after the residency requirement had accrued. The “stop-time” rule did not bar cancellation where first conviction was a petty offense and second conviction occurred after respondent accrued 7 years of continuous residence.

Question: What if I admit the facts of a particular crime?

Answer: If there was no conviction but the person admits facts, the petty offense exception applies and the alien is not inadmissible so long as the maximum sentence that could have been imposed does not exceed one year.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/petty-offense-exception/

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

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

https://californiaimmigration.us/how-a-deportation-attorney-can-help-you-win-a-cancellation-of-removal-for-non-permanent-residents/

===========

 

BALCA Declines to Penalize Employer for Timing Inconsistency in 656.17(e)(2)

Where the employer filed the ETA Form 9089 within six months of the SWA job order, but notwithin 180 days, BALCA overturned the Certifying Officer’s denial, finding that it was unfair to punish the employer because of a potential conflict between the terms “6 months” and “180 days” found at 20 CFR §656.17(e)(2), which provides the timing requirements for when an employer must place an SWA job order and file an application for a nonprofessional occupation.

Board of alien labor certification appeals

BALCA and immigration

Labor certification questions and answers

The Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner