Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
Laura Murray-Tjan writes: "I appealed pretermission of a non-LPR cancellation of removal claim to the Ninth Circuit, arguing that (1) the client's Arizona solicitation conviction can't be a CIMT ground of inadmissibility, as the agency had held; and (2) the underlying offense isn't a CIMT in any event. OIL conceded the first issue after I filed the opening brief, so the Ninth remanded to the Board. Much to my surprise, DHS then moved the Board to remand so that our client can proceed with her cancellation application. Before my brief was even due, DHS said that the Arizona statute wasn't divisible under the Ninth's August 22, 2014 decision in Rendon v. Holder, 764 F.3d 1077; 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 16254, and that the client's offense can't be a CIMT. I have attached the DHS motion applying Rendon."