Set Text Size:

S

S

S

2009

  • CA8 Finds 212(c) Relief Does Not Require Reliance on Pre-1996 Law(46 KB - 9/28/2009)
    The Court held that eligibility for 212(c) relief in removal proceedings does not require a plea agreement in reliance on pre-1996 law. Individual with pre-1996 conviction may still be eligible for 212(c) relief. (Lovan v. Holder, 7/31/09). AILA Doc. No. 09092862.
    AILA Doc. No. 09092862.
  • CA8 Remands for Review of Jurisdiction to Consider TPS Eligibility De Novo in Proceedings(39 KB - 8/6/2009)
    Court grants petition for review. BIA affirmed finding of lack of jurisdiction to review a TPS application de novo where AAU appeal was not timely filed. Remanded to BIA for statutory interpretation regarding whether administrative remedies must be exhausted before relying on TPS eligibility in removal proceedings. (Salguero-Fuentes v. Holder, 6/25/09). AILA Doc. No. 09080660.
    AILA Doc. No. 09080660.
  • CA8 Finds Correct Legal Standard Applied in Hardship Determination(63 KB - 8/5/2009)
    Court denies petition for review. Finds the petitioner’s claim that the IJ applied incorrect legal standards in its hardship determination, by focusing on the present circumstances of his children rather than on the future hardships they would face if he were removed, is not supported by the record and without merit. (Gomez-Perez v. Holder, 6/22/09). AILA Doc. No. 09080567.
    AILA Doc. No. 09080567.
  • CA8 Upholds Determination of Ineligibility for Cancellation of Removal Because of CIMT Conviction(54 KB - 8/5/2009)
    The court finds petitioner’s Iowa state court conviction for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated would not alone be a CIMT, but his conviction for child endangerment, which requires conscious disregard of risk to the child in his care, is an aggravating factor. (Hernandez-Perez v. Holder, 6/16/09). AILA Doc. No. 09080563.
    AILA Doc. No. 09080563.
  • CA8 Finds No Abuse of Discretion in BIA Refusal to Remand Despite New Material Facts(44 KB - 7/13/2009)
    The court finds it has jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision for abuse of discretion. BIA refused to grant motion to remand where the request to reopen provided a completely new basis of seeking cancellation of removal (Vargas v. Holder, 5/20/09). AILA Doc. No. 09071360.
    AILA Doc. No. 09071360.
  • CA8 Finds it Has Jurisdiction to Review Denial of Request for Waiver of Joint-Filing Requirement, Affirms(58 KB - 7/10/2009)
    Court affirms BIA denial of a request for waiver of the I-751 joint-filing requirement. Finds the question of whether a marriage was entered into in good faith is a “predicate legal question” thus it has jurisdiction to review whether petitioner met the legal standard necessary to establish his eligibility for the waiver. (Ibrahimi v. Holder, 5/20/09). AILA Doc. No. 09071074.
    AILA Doc. No. 09071074.
  • CA8 Finds No Abuse of Discretion in Denial of Continuance to Allow for Adjudication of Applications(55 KB - 7/1/2009)
    The court finds IJ did not abuse discretion in denying request for ninth continuance so that USCIS could adjudicate pending I-130 and I-485 because the petitioner failed to raise the issue in her appeal to the BIA. Also finds lack of jurisdiction to review denial of motion to terminate removal proceedings. (Hanggi v. Holder, 4/20/09). AILA Doc. No. 09070160.
    AILA Doc. No. 09070160.
  • CA8 Finds Error in Moral Character Determination for Naturalization Applicant(53 KB - 5/15/2009)
    The court reverses grant of summary judgment and remands. Finds there is no case law in which a court reviewing the denial of a naturalization application finds an applicant lacks good moral character based on outcome of an administrative proceeding. Applicant was listed in state registry for complaint of child abuse. (Nyari v. Napolitano, 4/13/09). AILA Doc. No. 09051560.
    AILA Doc. No. 09051560.
  • CA8 Rejects Argument that Government Evidence of Fraud is Inadmissible Hearsay(53 KB - 5/5/2009)
    The court denied the petition for review finding that the govt.’s evidence was admissible because it was both probative and fundamentally fair. Also finds statute of limitations applies only to rescissions of adjustment of status and not to removal proceedings. DHS alleged petitioner’s green card was fraudulently obtained. (Kim v. Holder, 3/26/09). AILA Doc. No. 09050560.
    AILA Doc. No. 09050560.
  • CA8 Consideration of False Statements Upheld in Denial of Status Adjustment(35 KB - 3/13/2009)
    The court held that the IJ’s denial of adjustment of status was neither arbitrary nor capricious where IJ did not ignore evidence, but found it unpersuasive. The court held that Dukuly was not deprived of due process by IJ’s consideration of his false statements in asylum application (Dukuly v. Filip, 1/27/09). AILA Doc. No. 09031371.
    AILA Doc. No. 09031371.