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
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Myoung Sook Lee, A098 772 839 (BIA Mar. 27, 2014)

Myoung Sook Lee, A098 772 839 (BIA Mar. 27, 2014)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,157|Likes:
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) sustained the respondents’ appeal and remanded for further consideration of their applications for adjustment of status upon finding they had not failed to continuously maintain lawful status for more than 180 days. The Board stated that under 8 CFR 1245.2(a)(5)(ii), an applicant who renews an adjustment application in removal proceedings need not meet the lawful status requirement of INA 245(c) if the requirement was met when the application was originally filed with USCIS. The Board also stated that the application should not be treated as new, rather than renewed, merely because the lead respondent was no longer inadmissible under INA 212(a). The decision was written by Member Teresa Donovan and joined by Member Roger Pauley and Member Linda Wendtland.

Looking for IRAC’s Index of Unpublished BIA Decisions? Visit www.irac.net/unpublished/index
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) sustained the respondents’ appeal and remanded for further consideration of their applications for adjustment of status upon finding they had not failed to continuously maintain lawful status for more than 180 days. The Board stated that under 8 CFR 1245.2(a)(5)(ii), an applicant who renews an adjustment application in removal proceedings need not meet the lawful status requirement of INA 245(c) if the requirement was met when the application was originally filed with USCIS. The Board also stated that the application should not be treated as new, rather than renewed, merely because the lead respondent was no longer inadmissible under INA 212(a). The decision was written by Member Teresa Donovan and joined by Member Roger Pauley and Member Linda Wendtland.

Looking for IRAC’s Index of Unpublished BIA Decisions? Visit www.irac.net/unpublished/index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 Apr 07, 2014
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved

Availability:

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

09/10/2014

pdf

text

original

 
Kim, David K.S Esq
U
Department of Justice
Execuive Oce r Immgraion Review
Board of Immigation Appeals Oce of h Ck
5107 Leesburg Pike, Sute 00 Fal Chuch, Vgna 23
AW OFICE O DAVD KS KM PC 154-08 NORTHERN BLVD SUTE 2G FLSHING NY 11358 HS/CE Oce of Chef Counsel -NEW P
0
Box 1898 Newark NJ 0701 Name: EE MYOUNG SOOK Riders08-72-5 098-772-838 A 098-772-839 Date of ts otice 3/272014
nclosed s a copy of he Board's decson and order n the above-rerenced case. Enclosure
Pan Mmbr: y, Ro Wdd id S Doov, T L.
Sncerely,
D
D
c
a
Donna Carr Chef Clek
ulseges tam Dock
For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished
Cite as: Myoung Sook Lee, A098 772 839 (BIA Mar. 27, 2014)
 
S. Depaent o ste
Executive Oce r mmgraon Revew Decson of he Board ofmmgraon ppeals Falls Cc, Viga

Fles A098 772 839 -ew N A098 772 838 A098 772 715 n re: MYOG SOOK LEE JAE E LEE
n
E LEE aka e Eun Lee  MOVAL POEEDGS APPEAL ON BEALF OF SPODETS: Davd K S Km EsueAGE Date otce: Sec. 237a))B) N Act [8 US
§
227a))B)-n the Unted States n voaton of aw a respondent) APPLATO: Adjuent of stas
R  7 2
Te espondents a mote and e two cdren and al natves ad ctzens of Sout Korea appea om e mgraton Judges Jau 24 2012 decson denyng ter appcatons r adjusent of stats une secton 245a) of te mgraton and atonay Act 8 US § 1255a)Te appea w be ustaned and the record w be remanded We revew an mmaton udge' cual ndngs ncludng te detenaton of cedty  cea eo 8 .F.
§
1003d)3)) We revew a remanng sues ncludng ssues of aw dcreton and udgment de novo 8 F § 003.d)3)) Becaue te respondent e e adment aplcaton ro to May 11 2005 t s not goveed y te rovsons of te EAL D Act
 ar ofB
24  Dec 2 45 BA 2006) The procedura tory of ths case s as ows The resondent was admed to the Unted Stte as a vstor on or about uy 27 2004 wth autorzaton to reman unt u 26 2005  at ) On February 18 2005 AT eathcare Servce nc ed an mmgant Petton r Aen Woker Form -10) on beaf of he respondent wth Unted State tzenh  mmgraton S") The reoent mutneo e
Applcaon to Regter Perment esdence o Ajt Status -485")  at
)
On Marc 6 202 e reponden ed an adavt statng that they are no onger represente by Ehu S ase Esue The appcatons of e wo chden are based on the aplcaton r adjustment of status ed b the moter the prnca espondent Therere ts appea w conce tsef wth the quacaton of te moe  te benets sogt
Cite as: Myoung Sook Lee, A098 772 839 (BIA Mar. 27, 2014)
 
A98 77 89 et al. On Decee 4, 005, USCIS apove te 40 e apova notce o -79) eect at e pettione a cange o A TC Heacae Sevices to Ona Heace, Inc In  wten econ ate May  006, USCIS enie te esonent' ajutent pction ecue se i not subt e certcation eque unde secton 1a)5)(C) of e Act, 8 U.SC. § 118(a )(5)C) On uly 5, 006, te esponent le a secon 485 i SCS (.J. t ). In a en ecio dte Decee 9, 006, USCS ened e esponden 85  o easons it, se was adisble ecase se d not suit e cecaon eqe une section 1(a)(5)(C) of e Act. Secod, se wa  ed o jusent unde secton 5(c)() of te Act ecause se fle to aintan connuously a sas Se ws unale to enet o secton 45(k) of e Act, ecause e e to antn contnuouy a law satu  oe tan 180 ays 8 C § 145.d)). On ovee 8, 006, te esponen e a ti 85 w USCS .J. at ) In a ten decion date August 1, 007, USCIS denied te espondents -85 ecase se le to anta cotinuoly lal stas  oe tan 180 ays. On Octoe 1, 007, e espondet le a  -85 wt USCS (J at ) On Septee 15, 008, USCIS ansavey cose te esponent's case ecause e as e suject of tese eova oceengs
(l.J.
at ). On Octoe 5, 007, te Depaent of Hoen Security HS) sued te eonent a otice to Appe In tese oceeng, te esonent enee e I-85 bse on e eaie appoved I10 (.J t  T at 1 ). e Igaton Jge denied te esonent' 485. Lke USCIS, te Igaton udge eteine tat e ws ineigie because se ile to ant connosly a stas  a eo tat exceee 180 ay une ections 5 c) an (k) of te Act (J at 56) T aea loe e ole sue on apea i wete te esonent  elgie  jutent of status.
 S gna Ma of acon,
0 I& N Dec. 557, 559 B 199) (setng  statutoy egily equeets  ajent of tus, ncudng awl aon to te Uted States, ng  applcation, elgbly  an avaaity of an iigant vsa, a aisily to te Unite States) On apea, e esponen gues tt e Igation Jge ee y not appying te goveing eguaon at 8 CF. § 5.(a)5))  In etinent pa, te eguaton ovie tat an applcnt ose ajuent alicaton s been ene by USCIS etan e igt to enew" e appcato n eova poceeings. Accong to te eguation, wen an aplcant enews an ajsent apcaton n eovl oceeng, e appct oe not nee to eet te statoy equieent of ecton 25(c) of te Act [contnuou awu tus] o§ 15g) visa avaiaty, if, n ct, tose equeent ee et at te tie te enee alicaton wa inay e t USCIS" 8 C.F.R § 15a)5)(i) e eonent gue tat e   On apea, te esponent eence e eguatoy ovisons peainng to te HS We cite to te eguaons apcabe to e Executve Ofce  Imgation eview, octed in Cate  V of Ttle 8.
Cite as: Myoung Sook Lee, A098 772 839 (BIA Mar. 27, 2014)

Activity (2)

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

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)//-->