Saborio, Juan M., Esq.

Law Ofices of Juan M. Saborio

2050 Coral Way, Suite 404
Miami, FL 33145
U.S. Department of Justice
Executive Ofce fr Imigration Review
Board of Immigration Appeals
Ofce of the Clerk
5 I 07 Leebur Pike. Suite 2000
Fals Church, Vrginia 20530
OHS/ICE Ofice of Chief Counsel - MIA
333 South Miami Ave., Suite 200
Miami, FL 33130
Name: FIGUEROA BRICENO, KARLA A 095-084-539
Date of this notice: 5/30/2014
Enclosed is a copy of the Boad's decision ad order in the above-refrenced case.
Enclosure
Panel Members:
Manuel, Elise
Adkins-Blanch, Charles K.
Hofman, Sharon
Sincerely,
DO Ca
Donna Car
Chief Clerk
Trane
Usertea m: Docket
For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished
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
Cite as: Karla Figueroa Briceno, A095 084 539 (BIA May 30, 2014)
U.S. dparent of Justce Decision of the Boad of Imgtion Appeals
Eecutve Ofce fr Imigaton Review
Falls Church, Virgina 20530
File: A095 084 539 - Miami, FL Date:
I re: KALA FIGUEROA BRICENO a.k.a Kala Figueroa
I REMOVAL PROCEEDIGS
APPEAL
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Jua M. Saboro, Esquire
ON BEHALF OF DHS:
APPLICATION: Reopening
Michelle M. Odio
Assistat Chief Counsel
MAY 3 0 2014
Te respondent, a native and citize of Honduas, appeals te decision of te I igaton
Judge, date November 19, 2012, denying her motion to reopen. Te Depaent of Homelad
Secuty is oppose to te repondent's appea.
Consideing te totalit of te circumstances presented in tis case, we conclude tat
repene removal proceedings ae warated to provide the respondent wit a aditiona
oppornity to appea befre an Imigation Judge to show why she shoud not be removed fom
te United States. Accordingy, we will sustan te respondent's appeal.
Wile we conclude that reopeing is warated, we express no opinion regading the ultimate
outcome of tese proceeigs at the present time. See Mater of L-0-G-, 21 l&N Dec. 413
{IA 1996). Accordingly, te fllowing orde is enteed.
ORDER: The respondent's appea is sustned, te in absenta order of removal is rescinded,
these reova proceedings ae reopeed, ad te record is readed to te Immigation Cou
fr fer proceedings consistent with te fregoing opinion ad fr te enty of a new decision.
FOR THE BOAR
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
Cite as: Karla Figueroa Briceno, A095 084 539 (BIA May 30, 2014)
f

UITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
IMMIGRTION COURT
I THE MATTER OF:
FIGUEROA, BRCENO, KRLA
Respondent,
I REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
APPLICATION: Reopening
ON BEHALF OF RSPONDENT:
Juan Saborio, Esqure
MIAMI, FLORIDA
FILE NO.: A095 084 539
ON BEHALF OF DHS:
Michelle Odio, Assistant
rhief ronnsel
The respondent has fled a motion to reopen her remova proceedings. The Depament
of Homeland Security (DHS) has fled its opposition.
The respondent asserts that she retaned the services of a paralegal who submitted a
chage of address witout her consent which resulted in her missing her hearing.
The DHS contends that the respondent has not exercised due diligence in seeking to
redress the issue regading her removal order.
Statement of the Law
Section 240(b)(5)(c) of the Immigration ad Nationalit Act (the Act) provides fr the
rescission of a in absentia removal order only--
(i) upon a motion to reopen fled within 180 days afer the date of the order of
removal if the alien demonstrates that the failure to appear was because of
exceptional circumstances (as defned in subsection (e)(l)), or
(ii) upon a motion to reopen fled at any time if the alien demonstates that the
Page 1 of 2
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
Cite as: Karla Figueroa Briceno, A095 084 539 (BIA May 30, 2014)
..
alien did not receive notice in accordance with subsection ( 1) or (2) of section
239(a) or the alien demonstrates that te alien was in Federal or State custody and
did not appear trough no fult of the alien.
Analysis
The respondent applied fr temporar protected status with USCIS. Afer denying her
application, USCIS issued the respondent a notice to appear. Thereafer, the immigration court
mailed a notice of hearing to te respondent fr Januar 16, 2007, at 8:30 A.M. On Jaua 16,
2007, the respondent was ordered removed to Honduras in absentia.
The respondent concedes that she received the notice to appear. The notice of heaing
was mailed to the address provided by the respondent. The respondent's claim of lack of notice
is, terefre, without merit. Moreover, by waiting over fve years to fle tis motion to reopen,
the respondent has faled to act with due diligence. See Matter of M-R-A-, 24 I&N Dec. 665
(BIA 2008). Accordingly, the motion to reopen is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERD this 19
th
day of November, 2012.
,..
SCOTT G. ALEXDER
Immigration Judge
Page 2 of 2
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
Cite as: Karla Figueroa Briceno, A095 084 539 (BIA May 30, 2014)