Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Kamleshwar Prasad, A099 681 885 (BIA Dec. 13, 2013)

Kamleshwar Prasad, A099 681 885 (BIA Dec. 13, 2013)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 315|Likes:
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upheld the denial of the respondent’s motion to reopen upon finding the April 30, 2001, deadline to establish eligibility under Section 245(i) of the INA was not subject to equitable tolling due to ineffective assistance of counsel. The decision was written by Member Anne Greer.
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upheld the denial of the respondent’s motion to reopen upon finding the April 30, 2001, deadline to establish eligibility under Section 245(i) of the INA was not subject to equitable tolling due to ineffective assistance of counsel. The decision was written by Member Anne Greer.

More info:

Published by: Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC on Dec 26, 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

01/28/2014

pdf

text

original

 
Chang, Richard W., Esq. Wasserman, Mancni
&
Chang 195
Stee. NW. Suite 400 Washngon D 20006-0000 ame: PASAD, KAMLESHWAR
U tt  ut
Executive Oce r Imgraton Revew
Board o Immigraion Appeals Oce o he lerk
507 lebug Pike Si 2000 Fas c Vginia 0530
OHS/IC ce of hef ounsel WAS 500 2h St, SW Mal Sop 902 Wasingon, D 2036 A 09968885 Date of hs notice: 2/3/203
Eclosed is a copy of he Board's deciso and order in the above-rerenced case. Ecosure
P M G  J
Sceely,
D
c
Dona Car Cef Cerk
wam  k
For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished
Cite as: Kamleshwar Prasad, A099 681 885 (BIA Dec. 13, 2013)
 
us
epatent of utce
Executve Ofce r Imiation Review Decision o te Boad o mmiaton Appeals Falls Church, Viginia
23
Fie A099 681 885 -Arlington, VA In re KAMLESHW
PSD N RMOVA ROCEDNGS APPEAL Date: ON BEF OF RESPONDENT Richard W. hang, Esqur ON BEHAL OF DHS CHRGE Ad  eg Assist Cief Counsel
DEC 1 3
23
 Notice Sc 237(a)()(), &N Ac [8 US.C
122(a()(B)] In he nitd States in vioation of aw APICATION Reopening; reconsideaton adjusent of status Th respondent, a natve nd citizen of India appeals the Decmber 23, 2011,
dna of a otion to ropn d reconsider seking adjusent of status under secion 245(i) of th Imiation ad Nationaiy Act, 8 US
1255( The Immigration Judge hld that the responden did not demonsate
prima fcie
egbiiy r adusment o statu Th appeal wil be disisse h ord rviws  Immiation udge's ndings of ct r clear rror
§
1003(d)(3(i) We reviw issues of aw, discretion, or judgment de novo
1003 1 ( d)(3)(i) 8 CFR 8 CFR Th respondent assts that h wa admittd to the nted States on May 11, 2000, nd h retand Erl S David, Esuire, on Ap 5, 2001, to e an appication r labor ceication on s behaf bere the Aprl 0, 200, "grdthring deadine
Se
section 245(i)( )((i of the Act The rcord shows tat the aor cication appcation wa ed on Jul 13, 200 On April 22, 2009, ntd Stas Citizensh ad Igraton Scs denied t respondents application r adjustent of stau cause he could not demonstrate tat a abor ceicaon ad bn

on s bhaf on o
b p
3, 0
S  T
gaton u
g 
t rspondents renwd appicaton r adjusnt of staus on Septm 29, 2011, d odred s reova Th responden ed no appa wth he oard In th otion at ssu h respondnt argud at th ng deadine of secton 25()()(B(i of the Act sould be equitab toled due to the ineecive assistnce of

David
1
hl te mmgration udg siged e dcison on Novemer 2, 2011, th covrshet accopanyng t dcsion shows hat i was issued on Dcmer 23, 201
Cite as: Kamleshwar Prasad, A099 681 885 (BIA Dec. 13, 2013)
 
 '
A099 681 885 The resondent has sased e rocedra reqireents of
Mttr ofLozd
19 &NDec 63 BA 1988)
S also Mar ofopen, Bangay, nd J-EC
2 &N Dec 1 AG 009
acan r reopenng ms he demonsrae
prm fce
egibity  he reief soht
INS

Abudu
485 S 94 0405  1988) As noted by he aon de the espondent as idented no ega ahoy song eqtabe tong of the deadne of secton 245i))B)i of he Act The resondent reies on
Prnj
v
Musy
516 3d 3 2d Cr 2008) hch s not bindng n this case sng ihin the rsdcton of he nted States Co of Aeas r the oh Crcit
e Mr ofAnselo
20 &N Dec 25 31 BA 1989 exainng at the Bod hstocay os a cous receden in cases arsng in that crcit) n any even n remandng r ctndin d a deteinaton of hether Pirane ad comed wth
Mtr ofozd
he co decned to addess wheher neective assstce of conse cod seve as a basis r eqtabe ong of the A 30 2001 gdhering deadne nder section 245) of the Act
rn  supr
a 145 Anoter cor has answered ths qeson n the negatie by aing the Bods hodn that the deadne nde secton 245) oeraes as a statte of reose and hs s not sbect o eqiabe oling
B/hu

Muksy
54 3 044 104850 9th C 008 Siary he oh Cict has hed that he rnces of eqtabe toing do not aly to stattes sch as secton 245i))B) of the Act "were srict satscton of a tme it ay be reqired as a recondion o rsdicon ove a atte
Hrrs

Huthnson
209 3d 325 328 4th Cr 2000) Therere as the resonden has no shown
pr f
eb r adsent of stats rst o secon 45) we ar the denal of s moton to reopen an reconsde Accordngy te owing orde s entered OER: The appea is dsmssed
Cite as: Kamleshwar Prasad, A099 681 885 (BIA Dec. 13, 2013)

You're Reading a Free Preview

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