U.S.

Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board ofImmigration Appeals

Qffice ofthe Clerk
5/07 Leesburg Pike, Suile 2000
Falls Church, Virginia 22041

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

CHAVARRIA-REYES, JOSE ISRAEL DHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - CHI
A206-274-376 525 West Van Buren Street
MCHENRY COUNTY JAIL Chicago, IL 60607
2200 N. SEMINARY AVE
WOODSTOCK, IL 60098

Name: CHAVARRIA-REYES, JOSE ISR... A 206-274-376

Date of this notice: 4/10/2017

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

Sincerely,

Cynthia L. Crosby
Acting Chief Clerk

Enclosure
Panel Members:
Guendelsberger, John

Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit

www.irac.net/unpublished/index

Cite as: Jose Israel Chavarria-Reyes, A206 274 376 (BIA April 10, 2017)
 U.S. De})artment of Justice Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals
Executive Office for Immigration Review

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

File: A206 274 376 - Chicago, IL Date:

In re: JOSE ISRAEL CHAVARRIA-REYES

APR 1 0 2017

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

MOTION

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Pro se

APPLICATION: Reopening

The Board entered the final administrative decision on November 6, 2015, when we dismissed
the respondent's appeal of the Immigration Judge's decision ordering the respondent removed to
Mexico. The respondent now seeks reopening, averring, inter alia, that he was not advised of his
potential eligibility for pre-conclusion voluntary departure pursuant to section 240B(a)(l) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1229c(a)(l) at his hearing. On December 30, 2016,
though denying the respondent's petition for review, the United States Court of Appeals for the
Seventh Circuit recognized that the Immigration Judge did not notify the pro se respondent of this
form of relief. See Chavarria-Reyes v. Lynch, 845 F.3d 275, 278 (7th Cir. 2016). Further, the
Department of Homeland Security has not filed an opposition to the respondent's motion. See
8 C.F.R. 1003.2(g)(3). Under the circumstances, we will remand the record to the Immigration
Judge to reassess the respondent's eligibility for pre-conclusion and post-hearing voluntary
departure under sections 240B(a)(l) and (b)(l) of the Act.

Accordingly, the following order will be entered.

ORDER: The motion to reopen is granted, and the record is remanded to the Immigration Judge
for further proceedings consistent with this order and entry of a new decision.

Cite as: Jose Israel Chavarria-Reyes, A206 274 376 (BIA April 10, 2017)