U.S.

Department of Justice
Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board of Immigration Appeals

Office of the Clerk
5 /07 Leesburg Pike, Suile 2000
Falls Church, Virginia 20530

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - DAL

Linda G. Nanos, P .C.

250 Fulton Ave, Ste. 200
Hempstead, NY 11550

125 E. John Carpenter Fwy, Ste. 500

Irving, TX 75062-2324

Name: SINCHl-SINCHI, LUIS

A 206-779-736

Date of this notice: 1 /16/2015

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case.
Sincerely,

DorutL e!tVVt-J
Donna Carr
Chief Clerk

Enclosure

Panel Members:
Holmes, David B.
Miller, Neil P.
Guendelsberger, John

Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished

Cite as: Luis Sinchi-Sinchi, A206 779 736 (BIA Jan. 16, 2015)

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Gigler, Claudia

U.S. Department of Justice

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Falls Church, Virginia 20530

File:

A206 779 736 - Dallas, TX

Date:

JAN 16 2015

In re: LUIS SINCHI-SINCHI

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT:

Claudia Gigler, Esquire

The respondent has filed an interlocutory appeal from the Immigration Judge's November 24,
2014, decision denying his motion for change of venue. We find it appropriate to exercise our
jurisdiction over this case and address the merits of this appeal. In the respondent's motion for
change of venue, he admitted the factual allegation in the Notice to Appear and conceded
removability. The respondent has submitted

an

application for asylum, withholding of removal

and protection under the Convention Against Torture. See sections 208 and 241(b)(3) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, respectively, 8 U.S.C. 1158, 123l(b)(3); 8 C.F.R.
1208.16(c)(2). Having appeared for several master calendar hearings in Dallas, Texas, he
requests that his case be scheduled at the New York, N.Y., Immigration Court in proximity to his
residence and witnesses. The Deparbnent of Homeland Security has indicated that they do not
oppose a change a venue in these proceedings. We find that good cause has been shown, and
will grant the motion to change venue.
Accordingly, the interlocutory appeal will be sustained and venue transferred to the
New York Immigration Court.
ORDER:

The interlocutory appeal is sustained, and the motion to change venue to

New York is granted.

FURTHER ORDER:

The record is remanded to the Immigration Court for further

proceedings.

FOR THE BOARD

Cite as: Luis Sinchi-Sinchi, A206 779 736 (BIA Jan. 16, 2015)

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL