U.S.

Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review

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

Goldblatt, Steven H., Esq. Georgetown Law, Appellate Litigation Program 111 F Street, NW Suite 306, McDonough Hall Washington, DC 20001

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - CHI 525 West Van Buren Street Chicago, IL 60607

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Name: MARGULIS, VLADISLAV

A 070-233-197

Date of this notice: 3/21/2014

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

bOYutL CaAAJ
Donna Carr Chief Clerk

Enclosure Panel Members: Liebowitz, Ellen C

Lulseges Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished

Cite as: Vladislav Margulis, A070 233 197 (BIA Mar. 21, 2014)

U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigmtion Review
Falls Church,

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Virginia 20530
Date:

File:

A070 233 197-Chicago, IL

MAR 212014

In re: VLADISLAV M ARGULIS

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

APPEAL AND MOTION ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF OHS: Steven H. Goldblatt, Esquire

Seth B. Fitter Senior Attorney

CHARGE: Notice: Sec. 237(a )(2XA)(ii), I&N Act [8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii)] Convicted of two or more crimes involving moral turpitude

APPLICATION: Termination; remand

In light of a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, the

Department of Homeland Security moves to remand the record to the Immigration Court to enable it to charge the respondent (7th Cir. 2013).
as

an arriving alien. See Margulis

v.

Holder, 125 F.3d 785

The respondent does not oppose the motion.

We will grant the unopposed

motion to remand.

See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.30, 1240. lO(e) (DHS may file additional charges of

removability at any time in removal proceedings ).

ORDER: The motion to remand is granted, and the record is remanded to the Immigration Court for further proceedings consistent with the foregoing opinion and for the entry of a new decision.

FOR THE BOARD

Cite as: Vladislav Margulis, A070 233 197 (BIA Mar. 21, 2014)

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful