Recently in Immigration Law Category

In a petition for review of the BIA's denial of petitioner's second motion to reopen his removal proceedings, the petition is denied where the BIA correctly determined that 8 C.F.R. section 1003.2(d)'s post-departure bar divested it of jurisdiction to review a motion to reopen filed by a removed alien, like petitioner, even though relevant regulations allowed an alien to file one motion to reopen within 90 days.

Read Mendiola v. Holder, No. 08-9565

Appellate Information

Filed October 28, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Baldock

Counsel

For Petitioner:

Kari E. Hong, Portland, OR

For Respondent:

R. Alexander Goring, Michelle Gorden Latour, Office of Immigration Litigation, (Michelle Gorden Latour, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC

In a petition for review of the BIA's order finding petitioner ineligible for cancellation of removal because he had been convicted of an aggravated felony, the petition is denied where, under the circumstance-specific approach, it was permissible for the Immigration Judge to rely upon sentencing-related material to determine the amount of the loss.

Read Hamilton v. Holder, No. 09-9505

Appellate Information

Filed October 27, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge O'Brien

Counsel

For Petitioner:

Yalila Guerrero, Houston, TX

For Respondent:

Anh-Thu P. Mai-Windle, Ann M. Welhaf, Civil Division, Office of Immigration Litigation, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC

In a petition for review of the denial of petitioner's motion to reconsider or reopen his deportation proceedings, the petition is denied where 8 C.F.R. section 1003.23(b)(1) was a valid exercise of the Attorney General's Congressionally-delegated rule-making authority, and did not contravene 8 U.S.C. sections 1229a(c)(6)(A) or (7)(A), and thus the Immigration Judge lacked jurisdiction over petitioner's motion because petitioner had previously been removed from the U.S.

Read Rosillo-Puga v. Holder, No. 07-9564

Appellate Information

Filed September 15, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Anderson

Counsel

For Petitioner:

Cynthia G. Burnside, Holland & Knight LLP, Atlanta, GA

For Respondent:

James A. Hurley, Attorney, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division, Washington, DC

Anh-Thu P. Mai, Senior Litigation Counsel, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division, Washington, DC

In a petition for review of a BIA order finding petitioner ineligible for adjustment of immigration status, the petition is denied where 8 U.S.C. section 1255(i) reasonably suggests that Congress considers aliens who accrue a period of unlawful presence more culpable than those immigration violators who do not, and thus, that the former are less deserving of relief under section 1255(i).

Read Herrera-Castillo v. Holder, No. 08-9538

Appellate Information

Filed July 27, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Tymkovich

Counsel

For Petitioner:

John Elliott Reardon, Glenwood Springs, CO

For Respondent:

Anh-Thu P. Mai-Windle, Senior Litigation Counsel, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC

Karen Y. Stewart, Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, United States
Department of Justice, Washington, DC

In a petition for review of the BIA's order denying Petitioners protection under the Convention Against Torture, the petition is denied, where failure by the government to provide a complete record of the proceedings below does not constitute a due process violation unless a petitioner can show prejudice.

Read Witjaksono v. Holder, No. 08-9540

Appellate Information

Filed July 17, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Lucero

Counsel

For Petitioners:

Lisa Suzanne Anderson, VHF Law Group, Los Angeles, CA

Houman Varzandeh, VHF Law Group, Los Angeles, CA

For Respondent:

William C. Minick, Assistant Director, United States Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC

Linda S. Wernery, Assistant Director, United States Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC

Petitioner's petition for review of the BIA's order denying his application for cancellation of removal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, where Petitioner's disputes with the factual findings of the Immigration Judge did not rise to the level of due process violations.

Read Arambula-Medina v. Holder, No. 08-9589

Appellate Information

Filed July 10, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Briscoe

Counsel

For Petitioner:

Robert Brown, Oklahoma City, OK

For Respondent:

Stephen J. Flynn, Assistant Director, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC

Defendant's conviction for illegally reentering the U.S. is affirmed, where Defendant waived his argument that the District Court erred by expanding the indictment, because he stipulated to the prior deportations at issue during trial.

Read US v. Cruz-Rodriguez, No. 07-4083

Appellate Information

Filed on June 24, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Holmes

Counsel

For Appellant:

Scott Keith Wilson, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Salt Lake City, UT

Steven B. Killpack, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Salt Lake City, UT

For Appellee:

Elizabethanne C. Stevens, Assistant United States Attorney, Salt Lake City, UT

Brett L. Tolman, Assistant United States Attorney, Salt Lake City, UT

Petitioner's petition for review of the BIA's order denying his petition to reopen is denied where: 1) the record reflected that the BIA fully considered the evidence submitted by Petitioner; and 2) Petitioner's challenges to the BIA's factual assumptions could not be recast as constitutional claims falling under the jurisdictional safe-harbor of 8 U.S.C. section 1252(a)(2)(D).

Read the full decision in Alzainati v. Holder, No. 07-9565.

Appellate Information:

APPEAL FROM THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS PETITION FOR REVIEW
Filed on June 17, 2009

Judges:

Before O'BRIEN, Circuit Judge, BRORBY, Senior Circuit Judge, and McCONNELL, Circuit Judge.

Opinion by O'BRIEN, Circuit Judge.

Counsel:

Submitted on the briefs. After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal.

Daniel F. Boyle, Denver, Colorado, for Petitioner.

Mark C. Walters, Assistant Director, Joanne E. Johnson, Attorney, Department of
Justice, Civil Division, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.