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

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - DEN

Reardon Law Group

9261 N. Washington Street
Thornton, CO 80229

12445 East Caley Avenue

Centennial, CO 80111-5663

Name: BACA CHAVEZ, RENE

A 200-726-166

Date of this notice: 12/16/2014

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

DcnrtL ca.AA)
Donna Carr
Chief Clerk

Enclosure

Panel Members:
Guendelsberger, John
Hoffman, Sharon
Manuel, Elise

Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished

Cite as: Rene Baca-Chavez, A200 726 166 (BIA Dec. 16, 2014)

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Reardon, Dain F., Esquire

U.S. Department of Justice

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Executive Office for Immigration Review

.
Falls Church, Virginia 20530

File:

Date:

A200 726 166 - Denver, CO

.DEC l G 2014

In re: RENE BACA-CHAVEZ

APPEAL
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT:

Dain F. Reardon, Esquire

ORDER:
The respondent, a native and citizen of Mexico, appeals from the Immigration Judge's
decision dated March 13, 2013, which denied his request for a continuance, denied voluntary
departure under section 240B of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C.

1229c, and

ordered him removed from the United States.

The Department of Homeland Security has not

replied to the respondent's brief on appeal.

The appeal will be sustained and the record

remanded.
We review Immigration Judges' findings of fact for clear error, but we review questions of
law,

discretion,

and judgment,

and

all

other

issues

in

appeals

de

novo.

8 C.F.R.

1003.1(d)(3)(i), (ii).
The record shows that the respondent was represented by counsel at a master calendar

hearing on February 20, 2013. On March 4, 2013, counsel filed with the Immigration Court a
motion to withdraw. During the next scheduled master calendar hearing on March 13, 2013, the
Immigration Judge granted the motion (Tr. at 14-15). At that time, the respondent requested
additional time in which to secure new counsel (Tr. at 16-17). The Immigration Judge denied the
request, found that the respondent rejected voluntary departure, and ordered him removed (Tr. at
17). The respondent argues that the Immigration Judge erred in denying a continuance to seek
new counsel and that he was prevented from requesting and establishing eligibility for voluntary
departure as a result.
We find that granting a continuance in this instance would have been appropriate. Matter

of

C-B-, 25 I&N Dec. 888, 889-90 (BIA 2012). Thus, we will sustain the appeal and remand the
record for further proceedings. On remand, the Immigration Judge should give the respondent
sufficient time to obtain legal representation, advise him of his apparent eligibility for relief from
removal, and allow him to apply for any form of relief for which he may be eligible.
Accordingly, 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: Rene Baca-Chavez, A200 726 166 (BIA Dec. 16, 2014)

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

IMMIGRATION COURT
621 17TH STREET,
DENVER,

SUITE 300

CO

80293

In the Matter of
Case No.:
BACA CHAVEZ,

A200-726-166

RENE
IN REMOVAL

Respondent

PROCEEDINGS
-

This is a summary of the oral decision entered on

This memorandum is solely for the convenience of the parties.

proceedin
the

should be appealed or reopened,

If the

the oral decision will become

cial opinion in the case.

The respondent was ordered removed from the United States to

CO or in the alternative to .
Respondent's application for voluntary departure was
respondent
was ordered removed to MEXICO or in the

denied and

alternative to .
Respondent's application for voluntary departure was granted until
upon posting a bond in the amount of

with an alternate order of removal to MEXICO.

Respondent's application for:

[
[
[
[

]
]
]
]

Asylum was {

}granted

)denied{

Withholding of removal was (

A Waiver under SP.ction

}withdrawn.

)granted (
was (

)denied

)granted (

)withdrawn.

)denied

Cancellation of removal under section 240A(a} was (

(

)withdrawn.

)granted

)denied

)withdrawn.

Respondent's application for:

Cancellation under section 240A(b) (1) was {

{

If granted,

} withdrawn.

granted

) denied

it is ordered that the respondent be issued

all appropriate documents necessary to give effect to this order.

Cancellation under section 240A{b) (2) was
(

)withdrawn.

)granted

)denied

If granted it is ordered that the respondent

be issued

all appropriated documents necessary to give effect to this order.

Adjustment of Status under Section
(

)withdrawn.

If

was

)granted

)denied

granted it is ordered that the respondent be issued

all appropriated documents necessary to give effect to this order.

Respondent's application of (

) withholding of removal

) deferral of

removal under Article III of the Convention Against Torture was

(

) granted

denied

withdrawn.

Respondent's status was rescinded under section 246.

Respondent is admitted to the United States as a
As

condition of admission,

Respondent

until

respondent is to post a

notice.
Respondent was advised of the limitation on discreti
failure to appear as ordered in the Immigration

udg

Proceedings were terminated.

Other:
Date:

Appeal:

bond.

knowingly filed a frivolous asylum application after proper

Feb 20,

2013

Waived/R

Immigration Judge
Appeal Due By!

Apr 12,

ff

2013

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

ORDER OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE