P. 1
Ricardo Cisneros, A075 789 006 (BIA Aug. 30, 2013)

Ricardo Cisneros, A075 789 006 (BIA Aug. 30, 2013)

|Views: 415|Likes:
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) granted an interlocutory DHS appeal challenging the administrative closure of proceedings against a detained respondent because the immigration judge failed to discuss the factors listed in Matter of Avetisyan, 25 I&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2012), or whether the respondent should continue to be detained while the proceedings are closed. The decision was written by Member Edward Grant.
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) granted an interlocutory DHS appeal challenging the administrative closure of proceedings against a detained respondent because the immigration judge failed to discuss the factors listed in Matter of Avetisyan, 25 I&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2012), or whether the respondent should continue to be detained while the proceedings are closed. The decision was written by Member Edward Grant.

More info:

Published by: Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC on Sep 06, 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

U.S.

Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board ofImmigration Appeals Office of the Clerk
5107 lee.sburg Pike. Suite 2000 Falls Church, Virginia 1204 J

CISNEROS, RICARDO A075-789-006 OIC, William McMinn Stewart Detention Center 146 CCA Road Lumpkin, GA 3 1815

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - SOC 146 CCA Road Lumpkin, GA 31815

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Name: CISNEROS, RICARDO

A 075-789-006

Date of this notice: 8 /3 0/2013

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

DcrutL c11/VL)
Donna Carr Chief Clerk

Enclosure Panel Members: Grant, Edward R.

Trane Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished

Cite as: Ricardo Cisneros, A075 789 006 (BIA Aug. 30, 2013)

'

..

U.S. Department of Justice
�xecutive Office for Immigration Review Falls Church, Vifginia

Decision of the Board oflmmigration Appeals

2io4 l
Date:

File:

A075 789 006 - Lumpkin, Georgia

AUG 3 0 2013

In re: RICARDO CISNEROS IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF DHS: Pro se

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Bianca H. Brown Assistant Chief Counsel

APPLICATION: Administrative closure

The Department of Homeland Security filed an interlocutory appeal from the Immigration Judge's order entered on April 22, 2013, administratively closing these removal proceedings to allow the respondent's United States citizen spouse the opportunity to file an immigrant visa petition (form

1-130) on his behalf with the U.S.

Citizenship and Immigration Services.

We will

remand the record for further proceedings. In Matier ofAvetisyan, 25 I&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2012), the Board set out a number of factors to be considered in determining whether administrative closure of proceedings is appropriate. 696-97. administratively closing these removal proceedings. objection to administrative closure. Id at In this case, the Immigration Judge issued an "Order of the Immigration Judge" However, the form order does not include

any analysis weighing the relevant factors cited in Matier of Avetisyan, including the DHS's Furthermore, given that the Immigration Judge's order directs the administrative closure of these removal proceedings, it does not address the issue of the respondent's custody status during such time, and whether he should continue to be detained, inasmuch as the respondent appears to fall within the classes of aliens subject to mandatory detention pursuant to section 236(c)(1) of the Act. See 8 C.F.R.

§ 1003. l 9(h)(2)(i)(D).

Thus, the Immigration Judge's decision, as presently constituted, precludes us from meaningfully reviewing the issues raised on appeal, including whether adjudication of the merits ' of this interlocutory appeal is appropriate. We therefore will remand the record for the issuance of a more complete decision. returning the record to the Board.
1

See Matier of A-P-, 22 I&N Dec. 468 (BIA 1999). Accordingly, the following order will be entered.

Upon

preparation of the full decision, the Immigration Judge should issue an order administratively

To avoid piecemeal review of the myriad of questions which may arise in the course of See We have, however, on occasion ruled

proceedings before us, this Board does not ordinarily entertain interlocutory appeals. Matter ofRuiz-Campuzano, 17 I&N Dec. 108 (BIA 1979).

on the merits of interlocutory appeals where we deemed it necessary to address important jurisdictional questions regarding the administration of the immigration laws, or to correct recurring problems in the handling of cases by immigration judges. See e.g., Matter ofGuevara, 20 I&N Dec. 238 (BIA 1990, 1991); Matter ofDobere, 20 l&N Dec. 188 (BIA 1990).

Cite as: Ricardo Cisneros, A075 789 006 (BIA Aug. 30, 2013)

f ./

I. ..

A075 789 006

The record is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the foregoing decision and for actions deemed appropriate by the gration Judge.
ORDER:
·

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

2

Cite as: Ricardo Cisneros, A075 789 006 (BIA Aug. 30, 2013)

(

(

IMMIGRATION COURT 146 CCA ROAD LUMPKIN, In the Matter of Case No.: CISNEROS, RICARDO IN REMOVAL PROCEEDIN G ORDER O F THE Respondent A075-789-006 GA 31815

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

This is a swnmary of the oral decision entered on This memorandum is solely for the convenience of tH proceedings should be appealed or reopened, the official opinion in the case. the or 1 d pa the become

[

J

The respondent was ordered removed from the United States to or in the alternative to . Respondent's application for voluntary departure was denied and respondent was ordered removed to alternative to . Respondent's application for voluntary departure was granted until upon posting a bond in the amount of or in the

$

�����

with an alternate order of removal to . Respondent's application for: [ [ ] J Asylum was ( )granted )denied( )withdrawn. )denied )withdrawn. ( )withdrawn. ( )denied )granted )granted ( )denied Withholding of removal was A Waiver under Section ( )withdrawn. ) granted ) denied )granted ( was (

( (

1 1

Cancellation of removal under section 240A(a) was (

��-

Respondent's application for:

(

1

Cancellation under section 240A(b)(1) was ( ( ) withdrawn. If granted,

it is ordered that the respondent be issued ( )granted ( )denied

all appropriate documents necessary to give effect to this order. Cancellation under section 240A(b) (2) was ( )withdrawn. If granted it is ordered that the respondent be issued was ( )granted ( )denied

all appropriated documents necessary to give effect to this order. Adjustment of Status under Section ( )withdrawn. If granted it is ordered that the respondent be issued ) withholding of removal ) withdrawn. until
����

all appropriated documents necessary to give effect to this order. Respondent's application of ( ( ) granted ( ) denied ( ( ) deferral of removal under Article III of the Convention Against Torture was Respondent's status was rescinded under section 246. Respondent is admitted to the United States as a As a condition of admission, notice. Respondent w s advised of failure to Proceedin Other: Date:
��-

Respondent knowingly filed a frivolous asylum application after proper he ·tation on discre ionary relief for e Immigration J oral decision.
___

r
n

pear as ordere e terminate . 2013

ei
i

respondent is to post a

$

bond.

�_..."7'"'1,,.

r 25,
-----

Appeal Due By:

....,._, �,.,

/}

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)//-->