Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Socchea Yav, A089 655 240 (BIA Aug. 13, 2013)

Socchea Yav, A089 655 240 (BIA Aug. 13, 2013)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,342|Likes:
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upheld an order of removal and denial of adjustment of status upon finding the respondent worked for more than 180 days without employment authorization, stating that the mere filing of an adjustment application does not stop the counting of the period of unauthorized employment for purposes of INA 245(k). The decision was written by Member Roger Pauley.
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upheld an order of removal and denial of adjustment of status upon finding the respondent worked for more than 180 days without employment authorization, stating that the mere filing of an adjustment application does not stop the counting of the period of unauthorized employment for purposes of INA 245(k). The decision was written by Member Roger Pauley.

More info:

Published by: Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center on Aug 19, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/12/2013

pdf

text

original

 
RASMUS, DANIEL510 ARQUETE AVE. te 200MINEAPOLIS MN 55402
US Department  Justice
Executive Oce r Immigraion Review
Board of Immigrtion ppealsOce of he Clek
5/07 ebrg Pik, S1 000Fas Chch l 2204
HS/IC ice of Chief Counsel -BL 2901 etro rive, uite 100Bloomington N 55425Name: YAV SOCCHEAA089665240Riders089665241 089665242 089665243ate of this notice8/13 /2013
Encosd s a copy of the Boad's decision and ode in the aboe-rerened case.Enclos
 Mb:Ply Rg
Sinceely,
D
C
w
Donna Car Che Cerk
w k
Cite as: Socchea Yav, A089 655 240 (BIA Aug. 13, 2013)
 
U.S Deparent
of
Justice
Exe<utive Oce r Imiaton RevewDecson of the Board of Imaton AppealsFals Church, Virgna 
2204
Fies A089 66 40 Boomngon
A089 66 4A089 66 4A089 66 43In e SOCCHA YAVHOY 
HA
aa Houy HeakVOCH LANG CHACN HOR CHAN MOAL OCDNGSAALDaeON BHAL OF SONDNSD Rasmus squeON BHALF OF DHSCHARGhomas S MadisonAsssan Chef Couse
AUG
 3 1
 Noce Sec3a))B)I&N Ac 8 SC§1a))B)]Ine ned Saes n violaon oflaw a espondens)ALICAION Adjusmen of sause espondens appea e Immiaon Judges May  0 decison denying eappcaions adjusmen of saus unde secion 4a) of e Immiaon d Naonay Ac8 SC§1a)e appea wi be dsmssedOn appea e espondens conend a e Immgaon Judge eed in ndng eead esponden neigibe  adjusmen of saus unde secion 4a) of e Ac as anaienbred by secion 4c) of e Ac J a 3) Specicay e Immaon Judgeconcuded a e lead esponden s no ecuded om e ba of secion 4 c) of e Ac because e does no mee e equeens of secion 4) of e Ac IJ a 3) eespondens dspue e Immaion Judges concuson a e ead esponden engagedn uauoed epoyen  a peod eceedng 80 days I   e espondenalege a e ead esponden led s appcaon  adjusmen of saus wn 8 daysofe epiaon of is R1 saus suc a e was empoyed wou auoaon In e May
1,
0 decson e Igaon Judge ncluded by eence e po decsonsnd a hbis C D 4B ad A J a ) On May 1 0 e Immaion Judge asoaede espondens applcaions  voun dep
e Al e eences o eImmaon Judge's decson efe o e Api 1 01 decson uness oewise speced
Cite as: Socchea Yav, A089 655 240 (BIA Aug. 13, 2013)
 
A089 665 240 et aless t 180 days nd that, even if he dd engage in activities  is chch  ove 180 dayswithout authoizaton, is activities cannot be categoized as "employment Nowiding te espondents' asseions on appea, we nd no eason to distb teImiation Jdges decision nding the ead espondent neligibe  adjustment of statbed on the eaons cited in he decision (J at 2-3).
See
8 CFR§003(d)(3)(i) (203)
de novo
eview) Wie the espondents ase that the ead espondent did not engage nunatoized empoyment  ove 80 days becase he ed s applcation  adjustment ostats within 178 days o his visa expiation we note that the ing o an adusent of stasappcaton does not stop te countng peod of unauthoized empoyment
See
USCS PolcyMemodum,
Applicabili of Section 245) to Certain Employment-Based Austment ofStatus Applications led under Section 245(a) of the Immiation and Nationali Act 
(NeuldActing Associate Decto, Domestic Opeations, HQDOMO 0/23, July 4, 2008 Rathe adsent of status appict who is empoyed mst demonsate that any and a empoyentae his o he st aw eny is athoized by the USCIS nti the appication is ed andcontinuing unti his o he stas is adjusted
See eg. Matter of Duka,
18 &N Dec 282 (BA98) Pust to eguation  aien engages n "unauthozed empoyment uless he o seas empoyment authoization om the USCIS
See
8 CFR§274a2(c)(9) Hee te eadespondent does not dispte that e dd not e  empoyent autoition wi teSCSntl Juy 30, 2008 (J at 3) The lead espondents visa exped on Augst 3, 2007; teee,the lead espondent woked wthot authoiton  amost a yea exceeding the 180day mit(J at 3)
See
section 245(k) o the ActFe, the ead espondent aises on appeal the same aguments ased bee theImmiation Judge egading the ssue o wethe the activites e engaged in om Agust 32007, though July 30, 2008 with hs chc constiute "employent (J at 3) As nd byte Immigation Jdge, te ead espondent admitedy eceived emuneation om is chuc nexcge his wok n te  o oom boad d asic necessties (J at 3; Exh 2A)Pust to egaton, "compensation ncudes oom and oad (J at 3)
See
8 CFR§2142()(1) Fhe even thogh te compensation was not popoonal to the vale o theseces it was neveheess paid in exchange  the ead espondents seices (J at 3)
SeeMatter of Hall
8 &N Dec 203 (BA 1982);
 see also Matter of Bennett
19 I&N Dec 2(BA 1984) Thus, the lead espondent is ineigbe  adjsent o status (J at 3)
See
section 245(c) o the ActFinally the ecod eects that te espondents wee each ganted a 60day peiod ofvolntay depae conditoned upon the timey postng of a $500 The ecod aso eects teespondent wee povided al te necessay advisas in ths egad
See Mater of Gamero
25 I&N Dec 164 (BA 2010).he espondents have not povided evidence to the Bod thatthey timely ed te equied onds
See id
Thus, the oad cannot entate the voluntaydepae peods d te Iaton Jdges ateate ode of emoval shall ecome eective
See id
Accodingly, te appeal will e dismissed2
Cite as: Socchea Yav, A089 655 240 (BIA Aug. 13, 2013)

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
PatWohlford liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->