U.S.

Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board of Immigration Appeals Office of the Clerk

5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000 Falls Church, Virginia 20530

Hernandez, Christine M., Esq. Hernandez & Associates, P .C. 1490 Lafayette Street, Suite 307 Denver, CO 80218

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - DEN 12445 East Caley Avenue Centennial, CO 80111-5663

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Name: LEANOS-TORRES, ANTONIA

A 089-822-467

Date of this notice: 2/26/2014

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

D Ca.;vu
Donna Carr Chief Clerk

Enclosure
Panel Members: Adkins-Blanch, Charles K.

Lulseges Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished

Cite as: Antonia Leanos-Torres, A089 822 467 (BIA Feb. 26, 2014)

U.S. Department of Justice

Executive Offe for Immigration Review
"'
.

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

.. . '. '

Falls Church, Virginia 20530

File:
In

A089 822 467 - Denver, CO

Date:

FEB 2 6 Z0\4

re: ANTONIA LEANOS-TORRES a.k.a. Antonia Vital

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS APPEAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF DHS: Christine M. Hernandez, Esquire

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Kirsten Sinclair Assistant Chief Counsel

CHARGE: Notice: Sec. 2 12(a)(6)(A)(i), I&N Act [8 U.S.C. 1 182(a)(6)(A)(i)] Present without being admitted or paroled

APPLICATION: Remand

The respondent, a native and citizen of Mexico, appeals from the hnmigration Judge's decision dated May 1 1, 20 12, ordering her removal from the United States. In her appellate brief, the respondent argues that the Immigration Judge's decision is deficient, and she motions for a remand indicating that the Immigration Judge neglected to render a removability finding, consider her voluntary departure application, and she contends that the proceedings should have been continued for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to adjudicate her petition for a non-immigrant U-visa. The record will be remanded. The Board defers to the factual findings of an Immigration Judge, unless they are clearly erroneous, but it retains independent judgment and discretion, subject to applicable governing standards, regarding pure questions of law and the application of a particular standard of law to those facts. 8 C.F.R. 1003.l(d)(3); Matter ofA-S-B-, 24 I&N Dec. 493 (BIA 2008). We agree with the respondent that the Immigration Judge's decision is insufficient. See section 101(a)(47) of the hnmigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(47) (defining the term "order of deportation"); 8 C.F.R. 1240.12(a) (requiring that an Immigration Judge's decision include a removability finding and reasons for either granting or denying a request); Matter of A-P-, 22 I&N Dec. 468 (BIA 1999). The respondent on March 3, 2010, denied allegations three and four that are contained in the Notice to Appear and disputed that she is removable from the United States, as charged (Tr. at 4). On May 11, 20 12, the Immigration Judge acknowledged the challenges, but the hnmigration Judge did not specifically address them (I.J. at 1; Tr. at 15-16). In addition, the respondent on January 18, 2012, indicated her intention to apply for voluntary departure if her U-visa petition were to be denied (Tr. at 13). However, the Immigration Judge neglected to consider the application at the May 11, 2012, hearing. Moreover, the Immigration Judge on May 1 1, 20 12, denied, based solely on lack of jurisdiction, the respondent's motion for a continuance to await the DHS adjudication of her U-visa petition
Cite as: Antonia Leanos-Torres, A089 822 467 (BIA Feb. 26, 2014)

A089 822 467 (Tr. at 15). However, subsequent to the hearing, the Board issued Matter of Sanchez Sosa, 25 I&N Dec. 807 (BIA 2012), which set forth factors to consider when determining whether good cause exists to continue removal proceedings to await the adjudication of a pending petition for a U-visa. In light of the foregoing, we will remand these proceedings for the Immigration Judge to determine whether the respondent is removable from the United States, and if so, whether she is eligible for voluntary departure and a continuance pursuant to the factors set forth in Matter ofSanchez Sosa, supra. Accordingly, the following order will be entered. ORDER: opinion. The record is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the foregoing

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

FOR THE BOARD

Cite as: Antonia Leanos-Torres, A089 822 467 (BIA Feb. 26, 2014)

(
.,.

-
\.,
. .

UNITED

STATES

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REVIEW

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION DENVER, COLORADO

UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION COURT

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

F ile:

A089-822-467

May 11,

2012

In the Matter of

ANTONIA LEANOS-TORR,ES RESPONDENT

) ) ) )

IN

REMOVAL P ROCEEDINGS

CHARGES: APPLICATIONS:

ON

BEHALF

OF RESPONDENT: MS.

MS.

HERNANDEZ

ON BEHALF OF DHS:

SINCLAI R

ORAL

DECISION O F THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE

The Court will order that she be removed from the United States and sent back to Mexico. an order of removal. And the Court will enter she make herself

The Court will ask that

available for purposes of removing her and taking her back to Mexico. The Court will also put that Ms. Hernandez has 30 2012. days

in which to appeal.

CERTIFICATE PAGE

I hereby certify that the attached proceding before JUDGE

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

DAVID J.

CORDOVA,

in the matter of:

ANTONIA LEANOS-TORRES

A089-822-467

DENVER,

COLORADO

i s an accurate,

verbatim transcript of the recording as provided

by the Executive Office for Immigration Review and that this is

the original transcript thereof for the file of the Executive

Office for Immigration Review.

CHERYL A.

MANCE

(Transcriber) Inc.

DEPOSITION SERVICES, JUNE 23, 2012

(Completion Date)