Browse By Tags

Matter of O-M-O-, 28 I&N Dec. 191 (BIA 2021) - An Immigration Judge may find a document to be fraudulent without forensic analysis or other expert testimony where the document contains obvious defects or readily identifiable hallmarks of fraud and...

Alvarado Alvarado v. Barr (unpub.) "[H]ere, Alvarado’s testimony, like that of the applicant in Ortez-Cruz, did not conclusively establish a change in circumstances. Accordingly, the Government bore the burden to demonstrate that that it...

Matter of Pak, 28 I&N Dec. 113 (BIA 2020) Where there is substantial and probative evidence that a beneficiary’s prior marriage was fraudulent and entered into for the purpose of evading the immigration laws, a subsequent visa petition filed...

Hernandez-Cartagena v. Barr "Petitioner is correct that the IJ and BIA failed to adequately address unrebutted evidence in the record -- evidence that compels the conclusion that Petitioner’s family membership was at least one central reason...

Matter of J-G-T-, 28 I&N Dec. 97 (BIA 2020) (1) In assessing whether to admit the testimony of a witness as an expert, an Immigration Judge should consider whether it is sufficiently relevant and reliable for the expert to offer an informed opinion...

In spite of the deference afforded West Virginia's Workers' Compensation Board of Review when it comes to fact-finding, the state's Supreme Court, in a memorandum decision, reversed the Board's decision that awarded benefits for a worker's...

Tanusantoso v. Barr "Harmanto Tanusantoso and Wiwik Widayati (collectively, Petitioners) petitioned for review after the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denied their third motion to reopen, in which they alleged a change of country conditions...

Inestroza-Antonelli v. Barr "Marisela Inestroza-Antonelli, a native Honduran citizen, filed a motion to reopen her removal proceedings on the basis of changed country conditions in Honduras. She relied in part on the alleged dismantling of institutional...

Atemnkeng v. Barr "In her petition for review, she raises several claims, most notably, that her due process rights were violated when the Baltimore IJ deprived her of an opportunity to testify on remand. Concluding that Atemnkeng’s claim...

In order to rebut the presumption of compensability found in N.Y. Workers’ Comp. Law § 21, an employer must come forward with “substantial” evidence, not just some evidence, to the contrary, held a state appellate court. Accordingly...

Matter of SIngh, 27 I&N Dec. 598 (BIA 2019) (1) The standard of proof necessary to bar the approval of a visa petition based on marriage fraud under section 204(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1154(c) (2012), is “substantial...

Ali v. Atty. Gen. "All in all, the Board’s opinion in this case is a classic example of a decision that is incapable of review due to a lack of reasoned consideration. Its failure to discuss “highly relevant” evidence, see Min...

Pablo Lorenzo v. Barr "Because the BIA failed to properly evaluate Pablo’s undisputed, reasonably specific evidence, and because it applied the wrong legal standards with respect to his motion to reopen based on changed country conditions...

Arrazabal v. Barr "This matter is before this court for a second time on Francisco Arrazabal’s pending requests for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Arrazabal contends that he...

Orellana v. Barr "Ruth Jeanette Orellana, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying her all relief from deportation. The BIA upheld the finding of...