Professional Documents
Culture Documents
.
.
: /.:
I.
.
__
_
..
UITED STATES DEPATMENT OF. JUSTICE
EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMIGRATION REVIEW
AVAREZ-BENETT, PAOLA M.
300 NORTH WALKR AVENUE
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73102
IMMIGRTION COT
1100 COMMERCE ST., ROOM 404
DALLAS, TX 75242
IN THE MTTER OF
LUENCE, AA
FILE A 200-867-388 DATE: Apr 27, 2012
UALE TO FORWARD - NO ADRESS PROVIDED
ATTACHED IS A COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE. THIS DECISION
IS FINAL ULESS A APPEAL IS FILED WITH THE BOAD OF IMIGRTION APPEALS .
WITHIN 30 CALENDA DAYS OF THE DATE OF THE MILING OF THIS WRITTEN DECISION.
SEE THE ENCLOSED FORMS A INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPERLY PREPAING YOUR APPEAL.
YOU NOTICE OF APPEAL, ATTACHED DOCUMENTS, AD FEE O FEE WAIVER REQUEST
MUST BE MILED TO: BOARD OF IMIGRATION APPEALS
OFFICE OF HE CLERK
P.O. BOX 8530
FALLS CHURCH, VA. 22041
ATTACHED IS A COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE IMMIGRATION JUGE AS THE RESULT
OF YOU FAILUE TO APPEA AT YOUR SCHEDULED DEPORTATION OR REMOVA HEARING.
THIS DECISION IS FINAL UESS A MOTION TO REOPEN IS FILED IN ACCORACE
WITH SECTION 242B(c) (3) OF THE IMMIGRATION AD NATIONALITY ACT, 8 U.S.C.
SECTION 1252B(c} (3) IN DEPORTATION PROCEEDINGS OR SECTION 240(c) (6),
8 U.S.C. SECTION 1229a(c) (6) IN REMOVA PROCEEDINGS. IF YOU FILE A MOTION
TO REOPEN, YOUR MOTION MUST BE FILED WITH THIS COUT:
X OTHER: JGE'S DECISION
CC: PEGGY PRICE
125 E. HY 114, STE
IRVING, TX, 75062
IMMIGRTION COURT
1100 COMERCE ST., ROOM 404
DALLS, TX 75242
- JOIN MOTION TO REOPE (DENIE)
Cf
COURT CLERK
IMIGRTION COURT
500
<
FF
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
&
R
e
f
u
g
e
e
A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e
C
e
n
t
e
r
|
w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
In Re: Adam Laurence
United States Department of Justice
Executive Ofce of Immigration Review
United States Immigration Court
Oklaoma City, Oklahoma
Case No. 200-867-388
ORDER
Tis matter is befre the Court pursuant to the Respondent's Mach 26, 2012
Motion to Re-Open. For the reasons set frt below, the motion will be DENIED.
Te Respondent appeared befre the court with counsel on November 28, 2011
and requested pre-conclusion voluntary departure. The goverent had no objection. The
Cou ten granted Respondent 120 days pre-conclusion voluntar departure. The
voluntary departure expired on March 27, 2012. One day prior to the expiration of the
voluntary departue period, the parties fled a "Joint Motion to Re-Open."
The basis of the motion says that the paties have agreed to re-open to allow the
Respondent to pusue adjustment of status. However, there ae several problems with that
agreement. First, Respondent was apparently married Mach 19, 2012 -well afer
Respondent was placd into proceedings and only 8 days befre he was required to depar
the United States. Since the mariage was entered into afer being placed into
proceedings, it is deemed suspect. A mere to days afer the wedding, the new wife fled
an 1-130.
Second, the 1-130 has not been adjudicated. So there is no relief available to the
alien and he is not able to adjust his status.
Tird, Respondent filed to comply with 8 C.F .R. 1 003 .23(b )(3) in that the
motion is not accompanied by a application fr relief.
Therefre the Cou will decline to grant the motion.
Futher, as a result of the Respondent having fled the Motion to Re-Open within
the tie provided fr voluntary departure, the alterate Order of Removal to Canada is
immediately efective.
This 24t
h
day of Apri
hael P Baird
United States Immigation Judge
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
&
R
e
f
u
g
e
e
A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e
C
e
n
t
e
r
|
w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t