Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See 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
Gerald Morisset Boisvert, A041 905 505 (BIA Jan. 29, 2014)

Gerald Morisset Boisvert, A041 905 505 (BIA Jan. 29, 2014)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 437|Likes:
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) remanded for a hearing on whether the respondent intended to abandon his lawful permanent resident status by signing Form I-407 in order to obtain medical treatment abroad. The Board noted that the DHS bore the burden to prove abandonment by clear and convincing evidence. The decision was written by Member Linda Wendtland and joined by Member Roger Pauley and Member Patricia Cole.

Looking for IRAC’s Index of Unpublished BIA Decisions? Visit www.irac.net/unpublished/index
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) remanded for a hearing on whether the respondent intended to abandon his lawful permanent resident status by signing Form I-407 in order to obtain medical treatment abroad. The Board noted that the DHS bore the burden to prove abandonment by clear and convincing evidence. The decision was written by Member Linda Wendtland and joined by Member Roger Pauley and Member Patricia Cole.

Looking for IRAC’s Index of Unpublished BIA Decisions? Visit www.irac.net/unpublished/index

More info:

Published by: Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC on Feb 09, 2014
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

03/28/2014

pdf

text

original

 
Synder, Leslie I 4000 Ponce d Leon Blvd, Ste. 70 Cora Gables, FL 33146

Department
of
Justice
Executive Oce r Immgation Rw
Bard  Immigratin Appeals Oce  the Clerk
5107 Leburg Pike, Sute 2000 Fals Chc Vrgna 20530
OHSICE ice of Chief Counsel MIA 333 Sout Miami Ave, Suite 200 Miami L  Nae: MRISST BISVERT, GERALD  A 0905-505 Date o his oic / 29/ 204
osed s a copy of the Boad's decso ad ode  e abov-enc case. lose
 Mbs: Puy, Rgr Wndd Ld   Ptc 
Sceely,
D
c
w
Doa a Ce ek
wilame s Dck
For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished
 

Depaent
f
Jusice
Executiye Ofc� r Iaton Rvw Dson  h Bad  mmgr AppJ Fal Curc, V
2053
File: A04  905 505 -Miai, FL
I
e GED ORSSET BOSVERT  OAL PROCEEG APPEAL ON BEHALF OF SPONEN: eslie I Snyde, Esqe ON BEHALF OF DHS ia T Amas Assistant Chief Conse CARGE Date  Noice Sec. 22(a  (7 (A)( (I), I&N c 8 SC
§
82)7)()()(I)] Iigan -no ald mmignt isa o ent doument APPLICAION Reopenng
N
2 9
2014
In a decision daed Apil 25, 20, the Immigaion Jdge teminated the esonden's emoal poceedings wio pedice, lowing he esponden's compleon of an -407 Fom abandoning hs aw pemanen esdent (PR) sas On Mh 9, 202, he espondent ed a oton to Calenda to Cl te ssues o hs awl peaen esidence, wi a eqest  ony depte he epatment of Hoed Seuiy (DH) ed  oposiion to the espondens oton e Immigation Jdge deeed e esponden's moion o aend as a moton to eopen. e nd that eating  he oion o Caend as a Moion o Reopen was appiae, gen ha te deadines   oions o eopen do no apply n this instnce, as no emoal ode was eneed n hs case On Mch 28, 2012, e Igaion Judge enied he espondes moto t eope on e ound tha e esponden exected a Fom 07 Abandonmet o awl emaet esden as, nd s eee no ong a aw pemanen esden he esponden has aeale ts deision e wil ssain the appea, and end the ecod, so that the Immgaton Judge an condct a heng on whethe he esponden abndoned his awl pemanent esident staus On appeal, the esponden ges tha atough he executed a Fom -07 abandoning hs al peanent esiee, ha is no dispostie o hs ase, as he ams ha e id not ntend o abandon hs esdene e aso asse that the Imigation dge eed n aused e disetion in iing to aod hm adequae de poess. The ecod s ncle as to whethe on Mc
9,
202 when the espondent e s moton  to eopen, he was oside e Unied Ses nd n pan. In an eent, een if e esonden had depated and was otside he nied ates when is moton was led, te Eeen Cii,
 
A04905505  the jsdico i whic ths cse rises hed n
Jian L L
v.
US. A' Gn
681 .3d 1236 (t Ci 0) tt e poibtio in 8 CFR § 0032(d) n ot to reen ere te  pers is ide the Unted Stes is cotry t secto 240(c)(7)(A) f the ct,   § 1229 (c))(A) peritig oe otio t reopen nd is therere invlid. nder these cicstces tere is no qesto tht the itio Judge hd ursdcto t ente the respndents oton even if it ws led whe he ws outside te ited ttes We nte ht prsunt to 8 CFR §1001( p) the sttus f  lie ccrded PR stts  tentes po e f l oer of depottin, reovl, r rescssin o rder f reovl w etered gist the espoet  s cse nd te proceedigs theere did nt pete to ivest he respodet of his LR stt Alhogh the respdent pprenty signed n 407 dig e eig, he nw cis t he dd not genunely intend to bndn his P stts,  did ot uderstd the por f wt e ws signig The resndet neve hd  hering o tht cl d te -40 itsef sys tht the resndent is entite t i  ering  the bdnent isse The HS greed to teintin  tis cse to void n rder f reovl f te respndet geed to bd is PR ss tet is  citic eleent in whether there ws bndent of LPR sts The igtio Jdge nd tht f se hd nt terinted preedings, she wold hve issed  oe  ev d the responent cold hve ppeled such order t  ths Bord. The respdet opted to rego s optin so he cud ret t Sin r me  tretent We note tht te recrd reects t te respdet ws dvised to e rm 07 s ht he cold return to te nited ttes o Sin s  turst ner the Vs ver rgr J t 2). Te "benet in ths ce ws te blty f the resndent t re  te nited Sttes   B2 wich utitey ws deied The HS c e te beet f te brgin' guent, d ny rgment relying n te respodet's prevs repesettin, drig  heng on ed n ddition ny guets regdg bdoet nd coercn nd wheer he respndent nderstod the "bgn cn be de o red  well We ote tt der ogstning judicl precedents the DS hs  the bude t rve bdoent by cle d covncig evdece Uner tese crcstces we wll sustin the respondents ppel d rend the recrd n ccordce with the regoig opii. Accrdigly the llwng oder will be enteed OER The ppel is sstied nd the recrd s reded to the grtin rt r er poceedigs coistet w the regoig opin
r
w
iL
OR TE BO 2

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)//-->