U.S.

Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board ofImmigration Appeals Office ofthe Clerk
5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000 Falls Church, Virginia 20530

Naini, Jamie B., Esq. Law Offices of Jamie B. Naini 6075 Stage Road Memphis, TN 38134

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - MEM 167 N. Main St., Suite 737A Memphis, TN 38103

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Name: ARAUJO-NAVARRO, CRESENCIO

A 200-662-702

Date of this notice: 10/18/2013

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

DOWtL ct1JVL)
Donna Carr Chief Clerk

Enclosure
Panel Members: Guendelsberger, John

schuckec Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished

Cite as: Cresencio Araujo-Navarro, A200 662 702 (BIA Oct. 18, 2013)

U.S.

Department of Justice

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Executive Office for Immigration Review Falls Church, Virginia 22041

File: In re:

A200 662 702

-

Memphis, TN

Date:

OCT 18 2013

CRESENCIO ARAUJO-NAVARRO a.k.a. Crecencio Navarro-Araujo a.k.a. Inocencio Araguz-Navaro

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
APPEAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF DHS: Jamie B. Naini, Esquire

Jonathan M. Larcomb Assistant Chief Counsel

APPLICATION: Voluntary departure The respondent, a native and citizen of Mexico, has appealed from the Immigration Judge's decision dated January 12, 2012, to the extent that the Immigration Judge denied the relief of voluntary departure. The record will be remanded to the Immigration Judge. Nonetheless, under the circumstances

We aclmowledge the Immigration Judge's reasoning.

of this case, where the respondent had not illegally entered the United States in the past 5 years and where he was the beneficiary of an approved visa petition, we find it appropriate to remand the record to the Immigration Judge to reconsider the respondent's eligibility for voluntary departure. We note that the respondent testified that he would leave the United States if granted voluntary departure and that the Immigration Judge did not make a determination that the respondent was not credible. departure. We also note that the respondent was not otherwise statutorily ineligible for voluntary
In addition, we would not conclude that a discretionary denial would be appropriate

under the circumstances of this case.

On remand, both parties may submit additional evidence,

including evidence related to the respondent's current eligibility for other relief. Accordingly, the following order will be entered. ORDER: The record is remanded to the Immigration Judge for further proceedings consistent

with the foregoing opinion and for the entry of a new decision.

Cite as: Cresencio Araujo-Navarro, A200 662 702 (BIA Oct. 18, 2013)

/� (

\

\,

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION COURT MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

File:

A200-662-702

January 12,

2012

In the Matter of

CRESENCIO ARAUJO-NAVARRO RESPONDENT

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

CHARGES:

INA Section 212(a) (6) {A) (i) .

APPLICATIONS:

Voluntary departure,

pre-completion.

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF DHS:

WILLUM VERMELL

JONATHAN M. LARCOMB

ORAL DECISION AND ORDER OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE On November 30, 2010, the Department of Homeland Security

filed a Notice to Appear against the above named respondent with the Immigration Court. The filing of this charging document

commenced proceedings and vested jurisdiction with the Court.
B C.F.R.

Section 1003.14 (a) .

The Notice to Appear has been

admitted into evidence as Exhibit 1. Respondent appeared in court on June 16, 2011 and conceded

1

·�

(

that he was served with a Notice to Appear.

Based upon

respondent's concessions and the certificate of service attached to the Notice to Appear, properly served. the Court finds that the respondent was

The respondent was also provided with ten days as is required by

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

before appearing before an Immigration Judge, regulation. Respondent also appeared on June 16,

2011 and admitted the that is, that he is

factual allegations contained in the Notice to Appear, he is not a citizen or national of the United States, a citizen and national of Mexico,

that . he was not admitted or .. and alleged

paroled after inspection by an Immigration Officer, that he entered the United States in 1983.

The resp9ndent

further conceded his removability pursuant to INA Section 212(a)(6) (A)(i). Based upon the respondent's admissions and concession, Court has sustained the charge and finds the respondent removable. In that, the Department of Homeland Security has by the

clear and convincing evidence established the alienage of respondent and that respondent has failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that he is lawfully present in the United States pursuant to a prior admission. 24 0(c) (2) (B); 8 C.F.R. Section 24 0.8(c). To qualify for Section

Respondent applies for voluntary departure. voluntary departure,

respondent must show that he has conceded has not been

removability and waives appeal of all issues,

A200-662-702

2

January 12,

2012

(

convicted of an aggravated felony, security reasons,

is not deportable for

and is not an arriving alien for whom

proceedings under INA Section 240 have been or will be initiated . Respondent must also show that he has not been

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

granted voluntary departure and that he is willing and has the means to depart immediately, matter of discretion . that he deserves the relief as a

Discretionary considerations of an

application include the weighing of all factors including the alien's prior immigration history, the length of residence in business and 14 I&N

the United States and the extent of family,
.· ·

societal ties to the United States . Dec. 244 (BIA 1972) .

Matter of Gamboa,

Respondent has testified on direct examination that he will leave the United States if he is granted voluntary departure, that he has the money to leave the United States, and that his

only arrest was his arrest in connection with these Immigration proceedings . Respondent, however, on cross-examination

testified that he initially came into the United States in 1983, but has had many entries into the United States, annually before the year 2000, immigration border. at least

and has many stops at the the respondent

On examination by the Court,

indicated that he has only a brother in the United States and is married, but his wife is in Mexico . He also has six children in

Mexico and the reason that he has come to the United States is because he supports his children in Mexico .

A200-662-702

3

January 12,

2012

(

(
\

The Court has weighed all of the factors, the immigration history of the respondent.

and in particular

The respondent has

come to the United States as he has testified in order to support his family and returns every year, approximately the last five years or so. with the exception o f The Court i s not

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

convinced that the respondent has the willingness to depart the United States and to remain in Mexico should voluntary departure be granted, given the fact that the respondent has been

traveling in and out of the United States since 1983 and has, notwithstandin� the fact that he has been stopped at the border _ on many occasions, Therefore, returned repeatedly to the United States.

the Court will not grant the respondent both because

the Court is not convinced that the respondent will remain outside of the United States or that he intends to leave as well as in its discretion. ORDERS Based upon the foregoing, the following order will enter:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that respondent be removed to Mexico on the charges stated in the Notice to Appear.

�:�
4

United States Immigration Judge

January 12,

2012


(
I

(

CERTIFICATE PAGE

I hereby certify that the attached proceeding before JUDGE REBECCA L. HOLT, in the matter of:

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

CRESENCIO ARAUJO-NAVARRO

A200-662-702

MEMPHIS,

TENNESSEE

is an accurate,
.· ·

verbatim transcript of the recording as provided

by the Executive Office for Immigration Review and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the E�ecutive Office for Immigration Review.

FREE STATE REPORTING, MARCH 8,
;.i:".

Inc .

2012

· �:!

�\

(Completion Date)

', •1

·.'ii' ·-

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful