Set Text Size:

S

S

S

2009

  • CA2 on Exhaustion and Mandamus for Naturalization(57 KB - 9/30/2009)
    The court held that Plaintiff may not seek mandamus relief for his naturalization application where he did not exhaust his administrative remedies. (Escaler v. USCIS, 9/11/09)
    AILA Doc. No. 09093062.
  • CA2 Affirms Withholding Denial for Lack of Corroboration(66 KB - 9/29/2009)
    Finding that Petitioner failed to provide evidence corroborating his testimony, the court held that Petitioner failed to meet his burden for withholding of removal. (Liu v. Holder, 8/5/09)
    AILA Doc. No. 09092970.
  • CA2 Says No Natz Adjudication While While Removal Proceedings are Pending(86 KB - 9/29/2009)
    The court held that INA §318 bars DHS from considering a naturalization application where removal proceedings are pending and that individuals in removal proceedings may not avail themselves of 8 CFR §1239.2(f). (Perriello v. Napolitano, 9/1/09)
    AILA Doc. No. 09092969.
  • CA2 on Jurisdiction Over Natz Applications Under INA §336(b) (9/28/2009)
    The court held that USCIS lacked jurisdiction to deny a naturalization application once an applicant challenged USCIS delay by filing a district court action under INA §336(b). (Bustamante v. Napolitano, 9/28/09)
    AILA Doc. No. 09092887.
  • CA2 Finds BIA Erred by Ignoring Attorney's Sworn Statement(82 KB - 9/28/2009)
    The court held that the BIA erred by not considering the attorney’s sworn affirmation stating that Petitioner did not understand the immigration judge’s instructions regarding the requirement to show up at his hearing. (Kulhawik v. Holder, 7/6/09)
    AILA Doc. No. 09092875.
  • CA2 on Consular Nonreviewability and Material Support(124 KB - 8/13/2009)
    The court remanded to consider whether the consular officer properly applied INA §212(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI)(dd) by giving the applicant the chance to negate the allegation that he knew he was providing material support. (American Academy of Religion v. Napolitano, 7/17/09)
    AILA Doc. No. 09081371.
  • CA2 Finds Jurisdiction to Review Hardship Determination Due to Error of Law (5/8/2009)
    The court remanded for evaluation of whether Petitioner established hardship to his U.S. citizen children for purposes of cancellation of removal where the record was mischaracterized to an extent amounting to an error of law. (Mendez v. Holder, 5/8/09)
    AILA Doc. No. 09050867.
  • CA2 Remands Asylum Based on Persecution by Local Authorities(78 KB - 3/16/2009)
    The court held that the IJ erred as to the timeliness of the petitioner’s application for asylum and in finding that the petitioner had not testified credibly in support of his claims, and remanded the case for further review (Zheng v. Mukasey, 1/13/09)
    AILA Doc. No. 09031664.
  • CA2 Says BIA Erred in Focusing on Date of Conviction Rather Than Date Proceedings Began(86 KB - 3/13/2009)
    The court found the petitioner eligible for 212(c) relief because IIRIRA's repeal of 212(c) does not apply to foreign nationals whose deportation proceedings predate the Act's effective date. (Garcia-Padron v. Holder, 2/26/09)
    AILA Doc. No. 09031361.
  • CA2 Says Petitioner Is Bound by Attorney’s Concession of Removability(98 KB - 3/10/2009)
    The court held that an IJ may accept a concession of removability when it is not contradicted by the record and that the concession cannot amount to “egregious circumstances” that would free an alien from the representations of his attorney. (Hoodho v. Holder, 2/6/09)
    AILA Doc. No. 09031070.
  • CA2 Finds Petitioner’s Statement Should Have Been Suppressed(80 KB - 3/2/2009)
    The court remanded, finding error in the determination that Petitioner was removable in reliance on an unsupported credibility determination and that Petitioner's statement should have been suppressed. (Singh v. Mukasey, 1/21/09)
    AILA Doc. No. 09030261.
  • CA2 Unsure BIA Considered Equities as “Extraordinary Circumstances”(76 KB - 2/17/2009)
    The court rejected Petitioner’s claim that 8 CFR §1212.7(d) is inconsistent with INA §212(h), but vacated and remanded because it was unable to conclude with confidence that the Board applied §1212.7(d) correctly. (Samuels v. Chertoff, 12/19/08)
    AILA Doc. No. 09021761.
  • CA2 Says 245(i) Grandfathering Requires Proof of Bona Fide Marriage(72 KB - 2/10/2009)
    The court upheld the BIA’s interpretation that a marriage-based petition, for purposes of grandfathering under INA §245(i), must be based on a bona fide marriage to demonstrate that the petition was approvable when filed. (Huarcaya v. Mukasey, 12/12/08)
    AILA Doc. No. 09021066.
  • CA2 on Applicability of §212(a) “Savings Clause” to Repeat Offenders(75 KB - 2/9/2009)
    The court denied the petition for review, finding that an alien who is inadmissible under INA §212(a)(9)(C)(i)(I) is not eligible for adjustment of status under INA §245(i). (Mora v. Mukasey, 12/16/08)
    AILA Doc. No. 09020964.
  • CA2 Says Second I-751 Filed After Termination of Status Does Not Restore Status(96 KB - 1/8/2009)
    The court found that Petitioner’s status was terminated when he failed to appear with his wife at the I-751 interview and that the filing of a second I-751 petition did not restore his status. (Severino v. Mukasey, 12/3/08)
    AILA Doc. No. 09010668.