Pesikan v. Atty. Gen.
"Petitioner Srecko Pesikan argues that the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) erred in concluding that his 2018 Pennsylvania conviction for driving under the...
USCIS, Sept. 25, 2023
"U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced that it is exempting the biometric services fee for Form I-539, Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant...
[What cities? How many?]
EOIR, Sept. 25, 2023
Salary: $149,644 - $195,000 per year
Travel: 50% or less - You may be expected to travel for this position
Application Deadline: Friday, October...
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 09/25/2023 - "Through this notice, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announces that the Secretary of Homeland Security...
DOJ, Sept. 21, 2023
"The Justice Department announced today that it has secured a settlement agreement with United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS). The settlement resolves the department’s determination...
Matter of A-M-R-C-, 28 I&N Dec. 7 (A.G. 2020)
Interim Decision #3986
Matter of A-M-R-C-, Respondent
Decided by Attorney General
June 17, 2020
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of the Attorney General
BEFORE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(h)(1)(i), I direct the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) to refer this case to me for review of its decision. To assist me in my review, I invite the parties to this proceeding and interested amici to submit briefs on points relevant to the disposition of this case, including:
1. Would the delay in my referral of this case cause the respondent to suffer any “prejudice from any inability to prove his defenses,” Costello v. United States, 365 U.S. 265, 283 (1961), or otherwise prevent me from reviewing the Board’s decision in this matter?
2. Did the Board err in determining as a matter of its discretion that there was not probable cause that the respondent had committed a “serious nonpolitical crime”? 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(2)(A)(iii). In making such a determination, did the Board correctly conclude that the crime of which the respondent had been convicted in absentia was not “disproportionate to the objective” or “of an atrocious or barbarous character”? Deportation Proceedings for Joseph Patrick Thomas Doherty, 13 Op. O.L.C. 1, 23 (1989) (internal citation omitted).
3. Did the Board err in determining that the persecutor bar at 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(c)(2)(i)(E) did not apply to the respondent’s asylum claim?
4. Did the Board apply the correct legal standard in concluding that the respondent’s in absentia trial suffered from due process problems even though the Department of State had found that the trial had satisfied due process?
The parties’ briefs shall not exceed 15,000 words and shall be filed on or before July 17, 2020. Interested amici may submit briefs not exceeding 9,000 words on or before July 31, 2020. The parties may submit reply briefs not exceeding 6,000 words on or before July 31, 2020. All filings shall be accompanied by proof of service and shall be submitted electronically to AGCertification@usdoj.gov, and in triplicate to:
United States Department of Justice
Office of the Attorney General, Room 5114
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530
All briefs must be both submitted electronically and postmarked on or before the pertinent deadlines. Requests for extensions are disfavored.