San Francisco Immigration Lawyers

BIA Holds That Where DHS Returns An Applicant To Mexico To Await An Immigration Hearing Pursuant To The Migrant Protection Protocols And Provides Him Or Her With Sufficient Notice Of The Hearing, An Immigration Judge Should Enter An In Absentia Order Of Removal If The Applicant Fails To Appear.

May 12, 2020 Philip Levin

On January 31, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) sustained a DHS appeal, reinstated removal proceedings, and remanded the record for further proceedings. Respondent had applied for… CONTINUE

BIA Holds That, In Assessing Whether To Grant An Applicant’s Request For A Continuance Regarding AN Application For Collateral Relief, The Applicant’s Prima Facie Eligibility For Relief And Whether It Will Materially Affect The Outcome Of Proceedings Are Not Dispositive, Especially Where Other Factors – Including The Uncertainty As To When The Relief Will Be Approved Or Become Available – Weigh Against Granting A Continuance.

March 4, 2020 Philip Levin

On January 22, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) dismissed the appeal and denied the motion to remand of Respondent, who had been convicted of attempted possession… CONTINUE

BIA Holds That A Notice To Appear That Does Not Include The Address Of The Immigration Court Where DHS Will File The Charging Document, Or A Certificate Of Service Indicating The Immigration Court In Which The Charging Document Is Filed, Does Not Deprive The Immigration Court Of Subject Matter Jurisdiction.

March 3, 2020 Philip Levin

On January 9, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) sustained the DHS appeal of an order by an Immigration Judge (IJ) terminating removal proceedings based on defective… CONTINUE

BIA Holds That The Offense Of Making Terroristic Threats In Violation Of Section 609.713, Subdivision 1, Of The Minnesota Statutes Is Categorically A Crime Involving Moral Turpitude

February 10, 2020 Philip Levin

On January 2, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) sustained a DHS appeal and remanded the record to the Immigration Judge (IJ), who had found Respondent removable… CONTINUE

BIA Holds That An Immigration Judge May Rely On Inconsistencies To Support An Adverse Credibility Finding As Long As Either The Immigration Judge, The Applicant, Or The DHS Has Identified The Discrepancies And The Applicant Has Been Given An Opportunity To Explain Them During The Hearing. An Immigration Judge May, But Is Not Required To, Personally Identify An Obvious Inconsistency Where It Is Reasonable To Assume That The Applicant Was Aware Of It And Had An Opportunity To Offer An Explanation Before The Immigration Judge Relied On It.

January 29, 2020 Philip Levin

On December 12, 2019, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) denied the Respondent’s request for oral argument and dismissed his appeal of an order by the Immigration Judge… CONTINUE

H-1B CAP-SUBJECT PETITION REGISTRATION PROCESS

January 6, 2020 Philip Levin, Don L. Pangilinan and Scott A. Wilkinson

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) has announced implementation of an online registration process for the upcoming FY2021 H-1B lottery, applicable to all new* cap-subject H-1B petitions. Employer Petitioners seeking… CONTINUE

BIA Holds That Torturous Conduct Committed By A Public Official Who Acts “In An Official Capacity,” That Is, “Under Color Of Law,” Is Covered By The Convention Against Torture, But Such Conduct By An Official Who Is Not Acting In An Official Capacity, Known As A “Rogue Official,” Is Not Covered By The Convention. The Key Consideration In Determining If A Public Official Was Acting Under Color Of Law Is Whether He Was Able To Engage In Torturous Conduct Because Of His Government Position Or If He Could Have Done So Without A Connection To The Government.

January 6, 2020 Philip Levin

On December 6, 2019, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) in a lengthy and extensively footnoted decision, dismissed the appeal of a respondent whose applications for political asylum,… CONTINUE

BIA Holds That The Reopening Of Proceedings To Terminate A Grant Of Asylum Is Warranted If DHS Has Demonstrated That Evidence Of Fraud In The Original Proceeding Was Not Previously Available And Is Material Because, If Known, It Would Likely Have Opened Up Lines Of Inquiry That Could Call An Applicant’s Eligibility For Asylum Into Doubt.

January 3, 2020 Philip Levin

On November 8, 2019, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) sustained a DHS appeal, reopened removal proceedings and remanded the record to the Immigration Judge (IJ) so that… CONTINUE

BIA Requests Amicus Curiae Briefs

December 31, 2019 Philip Levin

On November 6, 2019, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) issued an amicus invitation welcoming parties to brief whether the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Esquirel-Quintana v. Sessions,… CONTINUE

BIA Requests Amicus Curiae Briefs

December 31, 2019 Philip Levin

On November 5, 2019, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) issued an amicus invitation welcoming interested parties to brief whether an Immigration Judge errs in terminating proceedings when… CONTINUE