US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, LAREDO DIVISION

US FEDERAL COURTHOUSE

------------------------------X
)
In the Matter of )
)
JORGE CHAVEZ SANTOS, ) Alien No.: 061-520-713
)
)
In Removal Proceedings. )
------------------------------X

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed affirmation of Luis

Trujillo duly affirmed the 11th day of February 2022, the annexed

Memorandum of Law and Exhibits, and all the Pleadings and

Proceedings heretofore had herein, the Undersigned moves this

Honorable Court at the Southern District of Texas, Laredo

Division, George P. Kazen Federal Building and United States

Courthouse 1300 Victoria Street, Laredo, Texas 78040 in front of

the Honorable Immigration Judge for an order releasing Respondent

from custody on his own recognizance pursuant to U.S. Federal

Immigration Law.

MOTION TO RECONSIDER BOND

 This motion to reconsider bond is respectfully submitted

with substantially more documentary evidence demonstrating why

Mr. Chavez-Santos is not a flight risk nor does he present a

danger to the community or a threat to national security. Rather,

to the contrary, Respondent has strong ties to the community as

evidenced with the facts presented below:

FACTUAL HISTORY

1. JORGE CHAVEZ SANTOS (“Respondent”) was and continues to be a

legal permanent resident since on or about June 2011 and is

authorized to work and travel in the United States legally

as evidenced by Exhibit A, a USCIS notice authorizing

Respondent to work and travel with his expired Permanent

Resident Card while his application to replace Permanent

Resident Card is pending.

2. Respondent entered the country illegally due to the horrific

and dangerous situation in his home country; however,

Respondent adjusted his illegal status with the assistance

of his wife and became a Legal Permanent Resident in or

about June 2011.

3. Respondent is a dedicated husband, father and grandfather to

his wife, Maria, his daughters, Julie (25) and Brenda (17),

his sons, Jorge (15) and Christian (3) and grandchildren,

Jasmine (10) and Paola (3 months). All of Respondent’s

 immediately family are American citizens/Legal Permanent

Residents, and legally reside in the United States as

evidenced by Exhibit B, family photos, and Exhibit C,

Respondent’s American Family’s Passports, Legal Permanent

Resident Cards, and Birth Certificates.

4. Respondent has dutifully been employed with Kewaunee

Scientific, where he installs and assembles laboratory and

technical furniture for more than six (6) years.

Unfortunately, due to Respondent’s detention, he lost his

job as evidenced by Exhibit D, Employment Letter.

5. Respondent has resided at 302 Dillion Drive, Statesville,

North Carolina 28625 for the past decade with his wife and

children. He owns the property, pays his mortgage and taxes

on it as evidenced by Exhibit E, Mortgage Documentation and

Tax Receipts.

6. Respondent’s daughter is currently pregnant with

Respondent’s grandchild as evidenced by Exhibit F,

Ultrasound Records.

7. Respondent’s own health is an issue as he has been unable to

take daily medications prescribed to him his physician due

to his detention as evidenced by Exhibit G, Medical

Documentation.

8. Respondent was once arrested due to a domestic violence

claim and a DUI in 2015; however, all charges were dropped.

 In response, Respondent completed a course on conflict

resolution and domestic violence as evidenced by Exhibit H,

Certificate of Participation for Conflict Resolution and

Domestic Violence.

9. Respondent is the sole financial provider for his entire

family. As evidenced by Exhibit I, numerous individuals rely

on his financial support, guidance, love, and presence. To

keep him detained hurts not only him, but his entire family

of American citizens and Legal Permanent Residents.

10. Respondent is neither a flight risk nor a danger to society

nor national security and has plenty of family and friends

with whom he intends to reside with, as well as continue to

work and pay taxes, so to that end undersigned respectfully

requests that Respondent be released on his own recognizance

with zero bail, on his own recognizance.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

11. After traveling to Mexico to visit his father and other

family members, Respondent was detained at the border re-

entering the United States.

12. Respondent retained this firm soon thereafter on or about

January 10, 2022.

13. A motion for bond was filed on or about January 18, 2022.
14. The Court denied Respondent’s motion for bond but advised to

refile for reconsideration with additional documentary

evidence.

15. It is respectfully submitted that the Order denying

Respondent motion for bond was erroneous as demonstrated

herein by documentary evidence attached hereto that

Respondent is not a flight risk, or a danger to the public.

16. It is respectfully submitted that the Court failed to

consider that Respondent has strong family ties to the

United States, was gainfully employed and can be again,

enjoys the support of his community and friend, and is not a

flight risk.

BOND DETERMINATION

A. Defendant is Not a Flight Risk

17. When considering a bond redetermination, the Court may

consider three main issues: (1) whether the Respondent’s

circumstances have changed materially since the immigration

court’s initial determination, (2) whether the applicant

poses an immediate flight risk, and (3) whether the

applicant is a danger to persons or property. See 8 C.F.R. §

1003.19(e); Matter of Guerra, 24 I&N Dec. 37 (BIA 2006)

18. The Immigration Judge has broad discretion in deciding the

factors that they may consider in custody determinations and

may choose to give greater weight to some factors, so long

as the decision is reasonable. Matter of Guerra, 24 I&N Dec.

at 40. Factors for consideration include: (1) whether the

individual has a fixed address in the United States; (2)

length of residence in the United States; (3) family ties in

the United States; (4) employment history; (5) record of

appearance in court; (6) criminal record; (7) history of

immigration violations; (8) any attempts to flee

prosecution; and (9) manner of entry to the United States.

Id.

19. When setting a bond amount, the Court must consider ability

to pay and available alternatives to detention. See, e.g.,

Hernandez v. Sessions, 872 F.3d 976, 991 (9th Cir. 2017) (“A

bond determination process that does not include

consideration of financial circumstances and alternative

release conditions is unlikely to result in a bond amount

that is reasonably related to the government’s legitimate

interests.”).

20. Respondent is not a threat to national security, is not

likely to abscond and is not a poor bail risk. Respondent

has a fixed address in the United States, where he has been

residing with his family and pays a mortgage and his taxes.
 He has been in the United States, primarily North Carolina

for more than ten years. Respondent has no intention of

fleeing from the immigration authorities if he is released

from detention prior to the resolution of removal

proceedings.

B. Defendant is a Permanent Resident

21. Respondent is a permanent legal resident with a pending

application which authorizes him to travel and work in the

United States as evidenced by Exhibit A. As such, he has

every reason to resolve and reconcile his affairs to achieve

his familial objectives.

22. The Court should mitigate any finding of flight risk by

setting an appropriate bond amount. Matter of Urena, 25 I&N

Dec. 140, 141 (BIA 2009) (“setting of bond is designed to

ensure [a noncitizen]’s presence at proceedings.”); Matter

of R-A-V-P-, 27 I&N Dec. 803, 804 (BIA 2020) (same) (quoting

Urena).

23. Respondent has close ties to the community, and is not a

threat. We are hereby submitting statements from his

employer, friends, family members, and those in the

community establishing that Respondent has close connections

here, and is not likely to leave as evidenced by Exhibits B-

I.
24. Mr. Chavez-Santos is not a flight risk nor does he present a

danger to the community or a threat to national security.

Rather, to the contrary, Respondent has strong ties to the

community as evidenced with the facts presented above.

WHEREFORE, Respondent prays the Court to release Respondent

immediately on his own recognizance or immediately to set this

matter for a bond hearing under INA section 236(a).

Date: Friday, February 11, 2022

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________
Luis Trujillo, Esq.
Manchanda Law Office PLLC
30 Wall Street, 8th Floor
New York, New York 10005
Tel: (212) 968-8600
Fax: (212) 968-8601
 INDEX OF EXHIBITS

A. Respondent’s Identification Card and Receipt Notice of

Permanent Resident Status and authorization to travel

B. Respondent’s Family Photos

C. Respondent’s American Family’s Passports, Legal Permanent

Resident Cards, and Birth Certificates

D. Respondent’s Employment Letter (Duration of Employment &

Reason for Termination)

E. Respondent’s Mortgage Documentation and Tax Receipts

F. Respondent’s Daughter’s Ultrasound Records

G. Respondent’s Medical Documentation

H. Respondent’s Certificate of Participation for Conflict

Resolution & Domestic Violence

I. Respondent’s Family’s Letters in Support