Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

U.S.

Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board ofImmigration Appeals Office ofthe Clerk


S/07 Leesln1rg Pike. Suite 1000 Falls Cl1111"Cl1. Virginia 22041

Tolchin, Stacy, Esq. Van Der Hout, Brlgagliano, Nightingale, LLP 634 S. Spring Street, Suite 714 Los Angeles, CA 90014-0000

OHS Litigation, Mira Loma Facility 45100 N. 60th St., West Lancaster, CA 93536

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Name: RAMIREZ REYES, FRANCISCO

A072-988-089

Qate of this notice: 1/19/2011

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above.referenced case. Sincerely,

Donna Carr Chief Clerk

Enclosure

Panel Members: Holmes, David B.

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished

Cite as: Francisco Ramirez Reyes, A072 988 089 (BIA Jan. 19, 2011)

U.S. Department of Justice


Executive Office for Immigration Review Falls Church, Vir

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

ginia 22041
Date:

File:

A072 988 089 - Lancaster, CA

In re: FRANCISCO RAMIREZ REYES IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

JAN 19 2011

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

MOTION ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: APPLICATION: Reopening Stacy Tolchin, Esquire

ORDER: Based upon the totality of the circumstances presented here, including: the lack of an opposition from the Department of Homeland Security; the evidence showing that the criminal court , recently set aside "as legally invalid for lack of a lawful factual basis for the plea, , the conviction that was previously detennined to bar adjustment of status (MTR, Exh. XX, p. 0135); and the sympathetic family circumstances demonstrated here; we grant the motion pursuant to our authority under 8 C.F.R. 1003.2(a) and remand the record to the Immigration Judge for further proceedings on the issues ofthe respondent's removability and eligibility for relief. 1 See Matter ofPatel, 16 l&N Dec. 600 (BIA 1978 ) (holding that the Board's remand order, unless expressly limited, "is effective for the stated purpose and for consideration of any and all matters which the Immigration Judge deems appropriate in the exercise of his administrative discretion or which are brought to his attention in compliance with the appropriate regulations!').

}--

FOR TIIE BOARD

1 We note that the respondent argues that, contrary to the allegations in the Notice to Appear, he was admitted as a tourist in 1998 and has not departed. This issue was raised by the respondent before

the Immigration Judge (Tr. at 7-10 ) and on appeal (Respondent's appeal brief at 4), but the case was ultimately decided by the Board on the basis that his criminal conviction barred an application for adjustment of status.

Cite as: Francisco Ramirez Reyes, A072 988 089 (BIA Jan. 19, 2011)

Вам также может понравиться