Castellanos-Ventura v. Garland "Petitioner Bessy Orbelina Castellanos-Ventura, a native and citizen of Honduras, seeks review of an April 19, 2021 decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA...
EOIR PM 24-01 "This Policy Memorandum provides updated standards to Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) adjudicators and personnel regarding the receipt of Notices to Appear (NTAs) filed...
Jeremy McKinney, AILA Think Immigration Blog, Sept. 12, 2024 "... Last week, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), in Matter of R-T-P- , handed immigration judges the authority to “fix”...
OFLC, Sept. 10, 2024 " The Department of Labor’s Office of Foreign Labor Certification Announces Revised Transition Schedule and Technical Guidance for Implementing H-2A Job Orders and Applications...
Visa Bulletin for October 2024 Notes D & E: D. SCHEDULED EXPIRATION OF THE EMPLOYMENT FOURTH PREFERENCE RELIGIOUS WORKERS (SR) CATEGORY H.R. 2882, signed on March 23, 2024, extended the Employment...
"The BIA committed legal error by determining that Barrios-Cantarero was properly given notice through a letter addressed to Adrian Eliseo and therefore abused its discretion by denying his motion to reopen. ... Here, the BIA failed to apply 8 C.F.R. § 103.8(a)(1)(i) in determining whether Barrios-Cantarero had received proper notice of his hearing; its proper notice conclusion is owed no deference. The document is clearly not addressed to Barrios-Cantarero and therefore cannot be proper notice to him. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(C)(ii), the lack of sufficient notice entitled Barrios-Cantarero to reopen his proceedings at any time. Accordingly, the BIA abused its discretion in denying Barrios-Cantarero’s motion to reopen." - Barrios-Cantarero v. Holder, Nov. 21, 2014. [Hats off to David J. Bird!]