Andrew Knapp, Esquire
US Department of Justice
Executve Ofce r Immigraton Reew
Board of Imigration Appeals Oce of the Clerk
5107 Lebg Pike Ste 00 Fals Church, Vgna 2030
Immigrant Access to Justice Assistance 1301W.2nd St #100 DHS/CS-Caiornia Serv. Ctr/CSC 24000 Aila Rd, i Vll/RU aguna Niguel, CA 92677 Los Angeles, CA 9006 Name: ALADO CRTEZ, VICOR
H ... A
070-81-971 Date of this notice 3/10/201
Encosed s a copy of the Board's decson and order n the above-rerenced case. Encosure
Pl Mb: v, T L h k-Bh h K
Sncerely,
D
c
t
Doa Carr Chef Clerk
ICd : k
For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished
Cite as: Victor Hugo Alvarado Cortez, A070 781 971 (BIA Mar. 10, 2014)
US Depme of sice
Executive Oce r Imigraion Review Deision of the Bord o igran Appel Fals
20530
Fe A7 781 971 Carna Serce Center Date
M.LR 0 214
In re VICTOR HUGO ALVARADO
CORTEZ
Benecay a sa etn ed b CLAUDIA YVTT TAMAYO etner IN VISA TITION ROCEDIS AAL ON BHALF OF ITIONER Andre Kap squre ON BHALF OF DHS renda Leanhar Asscate Cunse ALICATION etn cass status aen reatve r ssuance mmgrant vsa In a decsn dated Mch 12, 213 the Department Hmed Securtys ("DHS Caa Serce Ceners Actng Drectr (Drectr deed the pettners sa petn ed n beha the benecary, her stepther The recrd prceedngs be reanded rr denyng the sa petn, he Drectr ssued a Reques r Inrmatn because athugh the petner submed extense eence suprt the vadty the reatnshp beteen herse and her steper ms the evdence reated t ther reatnshp prr t Deceber 6, 29 hen her mther and stepther dvrced herere, n rder t estabsh tha the reatnsh cntnued, the Drectr requested addtna nrmatn ncudng evdence t sh that the pettner's stepther suppred her nancay such
mney rder recets canceed checks a retus, r medca/nsurance recrds as e as sch recrs r the pettner, crrespndence beteen the pettner d er septher, and adavts m ends my and ther knedgeabe ares In resnse he petner submted evdence, ncudng a staement, phtgraphs aats greetng cards n her dcuments but the Drectr und the evdence nsucen meet the petners burden pr. Speccay, the Drectr ntd that he there as eense edence a septher/chd reatnshp he the benecary as marred t th pettners mther, the ny evdence demnstrang a cnnung reatnsh aer he 29 dvrce as phts and a 212 Ddgers game tcet. On apea, the ettner ctes an unpubshed Bard case r the rpstn that here the reatnshp at ssue nves
adut chd evdence ud generay cme n the r cards eters, my phts and edence vsts she asserts tha she rded just ths tye evdence. Fuhermre she argues that the DHSs cy n adut chd/pent cases rests n cases beng granted because the chd n nger resde th the arent makng edence mre dcut t btan As nted by the pettner n apea her bden pr n sa petn rceedngs requres that she estabsh the reatnsh th her stether by a rendernce he
Cite as: Victor Hugo Alvarado Cortez, A070 781 971 (BIA Mar. 10, 2014)
A070 781 971 evidence.
Matter of Brantigan
11 I&N Dec. 493 (BIA 1966). A preponderance of the evidence is less strigent tha other standards used eg. "beyond a reasonable doubt or cle convincig unequivocal d convincing evidence but it does reuire that what the petitioner seeks to establish is probaly tue
Mater of E-M
20 I&N Dec. 77 79-80 (BIA 1989) (discussing the preponderance of the evidence stadd by comparing it to other standards) The evidence should sho that the ct to be proven is more probable than not
ater of Lemhamad,
20 I&N Dec 316 320 n.5 (BIA 1991) While the petitioner is correct that case law does not require proof of active paenting and continuing nancial suppot by a stepparent in rder to nd a child eligible r a visa petition (Petitioner's Br. at 2 (iting
Paler
v.
Rey
622 F 2d 463 (9th Cir. 1980);
Matter of Vzcaino
19 I&N Dec 644 648 BIA 1988))) here the evidence ust show that the pentcild relationship more proably than ot contiued since the parents relationship as terminated
see Matter of owrer
17 I&N Dec. 613 615 (BIA 1981) As pointed out by the Director ost of the evidence suitted by the petiioner in suppor of the visa petition docents hr relationship ith e eneciary prior to the eneciar's divorce o the petitioners other. There as evidence that the parties atended a Dodgers gae togeter in 201 and that the beneciary attended the petitiners graduation om college. The Director noted that most of the adavits sumitted by the petitioner docent the time that the petitioer d beneiary resided together prior to the petitioer's parents' divorce. Furtheore the adavits are all very vague ith no specic inormation aout how oen te petitioner and beneciary currently see each other hat activities they underake together and ho they maintain a close relationsip since the divorce. Nevertheless we nd that a remand is arrated in order to allo the petitioner to sumit additional eidence to sho a continuing relationship th her stepter lloing her parents' divorce The petitioner and beneciar clearly had a relationship and the respondent provided evidence hich specically respoed to the Directors Reuest r Inration. The Directors deial cuses on a lack of evidence hich as not specically addressed
the Request r Inration such as telephone records greeting cds and correspondence Therere it is not clear that the petitioner as give adequate opportunity to respond to the Directors reasons r denying the visa petitio We ill remand in order to give the petitioner an oppornity to respond to the Directors ding that cerain additional evidence beyond that listed in the rmal euest r Evidence should have bee provided
See
8 C.FR § 1032b)(16)(i) 20)
Mater of Cuelo
20 I&N Dec 94 9698 (BIA 1989)
atter of Obaigbena
19 I&N Dec 533 537 (BIA 1988) ODER: The record of proceedigs is reanded r rther proceedings consistent ith tis order ad r a e decisio assessig the evidence i suppor of the petitioners visa petition OR THE BARD
2
Cite as: Victor Hugo Alvarado Cortez, A070 781 971 (BIA Mar. 10, 2014)
Reward Your Curiosity
Everything you want to read.
Anytime. Anywhere. Any device.
No Commitment. Cancel anytime.