USCIS, Sept. 18, 2024 "Effective Sept. 10, 2024, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services automatically extended the validity of Permanent Resident Cards (also known as Green Cards) to 36 months...
Singh v. Garland "Petitioner Varinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, seeks rescission of a removal order entered in absentia. We previously granted Singh’s petition because the government...
BIB Daily presents bimonthly PERM practice tips from Ron Wada , member of the Editorial Board for Bender’s Immigration Bulletin and author of the 10+ year series of BALCA review articles, “Shaping...
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...
Matter of L-E-A-, 27 I&N Dec. 581 (A.G. 2019)
(1) In Matter of L-E-A-, 27 I&N Dec. 40 (BIA 2017), the Board of ImmigrationAppeals improperly recognized the respondent’s father’s immediate family as a“particular social group” for purposes of qualifying for asylum under theImmigration and Nationality Act.
(2) All asylum applicants seeking to establish membership in a “particular socialgroup,” including groups defined by family or kinship ties, must establish thatthe group is (1) composed of members who share a common immutablecharacteristic; (2) defined with particularity; and (3) socially distinct within thesociety in question.
(3) While the Board has recognized certain clans and subclans as “particular socialgroups,” most nuclear families are not inherently socially distinct and thereforedo not qualify as “particular social groups.”
(4) The portion of the Board’s decision recognizing the respondent’s proposedparticular social group is overruled. See Matter of L-E-A-, 27 I&N Dec. at 42– 43 (Part II.A). The rest of the Board’s decision, including its analysis of therequired nexus between alleged persecution and the alleged protected ground, isaffirmed. See id. at 43–47 (Part II.B).