INFORMATION ABOUT CANCELLING IMMIGRATION BONDS When is a bond cancelled? AUTOMATIC cancellation of a bond issued as a delivery bond shall occur upon any of the following, provided they occur prior to the date of a breach: DHS' taking the alien back into its custody Deportation/exclusion/removal of the bonded alien; Grant of permanent residence to the bonded alien; Notice of the detention of the bonded alien for 30 or more days pursuant, or prior, to a conviction by local, state, or federal authorities; Termination of deportation/removal proceedings; Death of the bonded alien; Voluntary departure by the bonded alien as evidenced by valid proof thereof. If an alien’s case has been administratively closed by the Immigration Judge, cancellation is not automatic, but the attorney or alien can request that the bond be cancelled by contacting the ICE office where the bond was paid. To look up a list of ICE offices, go to: www.ice.gov/about/dro/contact.htm. How do I obtain a refund of a U.S. Immigration Bond? When an immigration bond is cancelled, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Office of Enforcement and Removal Operations, notifies the Debt Management Center and the obligor (the person who paid the bond) of the bond cancellation via a Notice – Immigration Bond Cancelled Form (I-‐391). This notice is mailed to the obligor at the address he or she provided when the bond was paid. Upon receipt of Form I-‐391, the obligor must submit the form and the original Form I 305 (Receipt of DHS Official -‐ US Cash Accepted as Security), to the following address: Debt Management Center Attention: Bond Unit P.O. Box 5000 Williston, VT 05495-‐5000 If the obligor does not have the original Form I-‐305, a completed and notarized Affidavit in Lieu of Lost Receipt of United States ICE for Collateral Accepted as Security Form (I-‐395) has to be submitted to the above address. This form is located via the internet at www.ice.gov/news/library/forms/
Once the appropriate forms have been received and processed by the Debt Management Center, the obligor will receive a refund of the principal bond amount and any interest accrued during the life of the bond. IF THE OBLIGOR HAS MOVED AFTER PAYING THE BOND, the obligor must file a change of address with ICE on Form I 333 (available here: http://www.ice.gov/doclib/news/library/forms/pdf/i333.pdf). If the obligor does not file a change of address, the notice of bond cancellation will be sent to his or her old address. The change of address form may be presented in person, and upon presentation a signed copy will be returned to the obligor, indicating receipt of the change of address. However, the obligor may also mail this form to the ICE office where he or she originally paid the bond. To look up a list of ICE offices, go to: www.ice.gov/about/dro/contact.htm. IF THE OBLIGOR WISHES FOR ANOTHER PERSON TO RECEIVE THE BOND MONEY, the obligor must fill out Form I 312 (available here: http://www.ice.gov/doclib/news/library/forms/pdf/i-‐312.pdf) to designate an “attorney in fact,” who is authorized to receive the money on his or her behalf. Please note that the attorney in fact must have a valid social security number or Tax ID Number (TIN). The form must be filled out and signed by the obligor, must be notarized, and sent to the following address: Debt Management Center Attention: Bond Unit P.O. Box 5000 Williston, VT 05495-‐5000 For more information, please visit: http://www.ice.gov/news/library/forms/
Instruction Sheet for making a Request for Accelerated Resolution (SmART) 1. All items on the cover sheet applicable to your client MUST be addressed. 2. Be sure to include your name as well as your client’s name AND Alien number at the top of the cover sheet. 3. Type of Hearing, Dates, and names of Immigration Judges are provided in drop down menus. When your cursor is over the words “choose an item” or “Date” and a grey shadow appears, you can click on it and an arrow will appear which will allow you to choose the type of hearing, IJ name, or date from a drop down or calendar menu. 4. Be sure to select the type of upcoming hearing (master or individual) for your client from the drop down option. 5. By clicking on the box in front of each listed requirement, the box will change to a check mark. Please note in Item 4 on the list, that you will check only the box or boxes applicable to your client. 6. Please limit your discussion of the particulars of your client’s case to the outlined area at the bottom of the form. If you cannot fit this information in this box, you may supplement it, but you are encouraged to keep the information to less than one full page. 7. A SmART application for lasting relief cannot be considered without current fingerprints.
Policy Number: 10076.1 FEA Number: 306-112-002b
Office ofthe Director
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 500 12th Street, SW Washington, D.C. 20536
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
JUN 17 2011
MEMORANDUM FOR:
All Field Office Directors All Special Agents in Charge All Chief Counsel
FROM:
JohuMorton(2J. DIrector
SUBJECT:
~
~
•
Prosecutorial Discretion: Certain Victims, Witnesses, and Plaintiffs
Purpose: This memorandum sets forth agency policy regarding the exercise of prosecutorial discretion in removal cases involving the victims and witnesses of crime, including domestic violence, and individuals involved in non-frivolous efforts related to the protection of their civil rights and liberties. In these cases, ICE officers, special agents, and attorneys should exercise all appropriate prosecutorial discretion to minimize any effect that immigration enforcement may have on the willingness and ability of victims, witnesses, and plaintiffs to call police and pursue justice. This memorandum builds on prior guidance on the handling of cases involving T and U visas and the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. I Discussion: Absent special circumstances or aggravating factors, it is against ICE policy to initiate removal proceedings against an individual known to be the immediate victim or witness to a crime. In practice, the vast majority of state and local law enforcement agencies do not generally arrest victims or witnesses of crime as part of an investigation. However, ICE regularly hears concerns that in some instances a state or local law enforcement officer may arrest and book multiple people at the scene of alleged domestic violence. In these cases, an arrested victim or witness of domestic violence may be booked and fingerprinted and, through the operation of the Secure I For a thorough explanation of prosecutoriaI discretion, see the following: Memorandum from Peter S. Vincent, Principal Legal Advisor, Guidance Regarding U Nonimmigrant Status (U visa) Applicants in Removal Proceedings or with Final Orders of Deportation or Removal (Sept. 25, 2009); Memorandum from William J. Howard, Principal Legal Advisor, VAWA 2005 Amendments to Immigration and Nationality Act and 8 U.S.C. § 1367 (Feb. 1,2007); Memorandum from Julie L. Myers, Assistant Secretary of ICE, Prosecutorial and Custody Discretion (Nov. 7, 2007); Memorandum from William J. Howard, Principal Legal Advisor, Prosecutorial Discretion (Oct. 24, 2005); Memorandum from Doris Meissner, Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion (Nov. 17,2000).
www.ice.gov
Prosecutorial Discretion: Certain Victims, Witnesses, and Plaintiffs Page 2 Communities program or another ICE enforcement program, may come to the attention of ICE. Absent special circumstances, it is similarly against ICE policy to remove individuals in the midst of a legitimate effort to protect their civil rights or civil liberties. To avoid deterring individuals from reporting crimes and from pursuing actions to protect their civil rights, ICE officers, special agents, and attorneys are reminded to exercise all appropriate discretion on a case-by-case basis when making detention and enforcement decisions in the cases of victims of crime, witnesses to crime, and individuals pursuing legitimate civil rights complaints. Particular attention should be paid to: • • • •
victims of domestic violence, human trafficking, or other serious crimes; witnesses involved in pending criminal investigations or prosecutions; plaintiffs in non-frivolous lawsuits regarding civil rights or liberties violations; and individuals engaging in a protected activity related to civil or other rights (for example union organizing or complaining to authorities about employment discrimination or housing conditions) who may be in a non-frivolous dispute with an employer, landlord or contractor.
In deciding whether or not to exercise discretion, ICE officers, agents, and attorneys should consider all serious adverse factors. Those factors include national security concerns or evidence the alien has a serious criminal history, is involved in a serious crime, or poses a threat to public safety. Other adverse factors include evidence the alien is. a human rights violator or has engaged in significant immigration fraud. In the absence of these or other serious adverse factors, exercising favorable discretion, such as release from detention and deferral or a stay of removal generally, will be appropriate. Discretion may also take different forms and extend to decisions to place or withdraw a detainer, to issue a Notice to Appear, to detain or release an alien, to grant a stay or deferral of removal, to seek termination of proceedings, or to join a motion to administratively close a case. In addition to exercising prosecutorial discretion on a case-by-case basis in these scenarios, ICE officers, agents, and attorneys are reminded of the existing provisions of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA),2 its subsequent reauthorization,3 and the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).4 These provide several protections for the victims of crime and include specific provisions for victims of domestic violence, victims of certain other crimes, 5 and victims of human trafficking. Victims of domestic violence who are the child, parent, or current/former spouse of a U.S. citizen or permanent resident may be able to self-petition for permanent residency. 6 A U nonimmigrant visa provides legal status for the victims of substantial mental or physical abuse as
Pub. L. No. 106-386, §§101-113, 114 Stat. 1464 1466 (codified as amended in scattered sections of the U.S.c.). William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of2008, Pub. L. No. 110-457, 122 Stat. 1464, 1491 (codified as amended in scattered sections of the U.S.c.). 4 Pub. L. o. 106-386, §§1001-1603, 114 Stat. 1464, 1491 (codified as amended in scattered sections of the U.S.C.). 5 For a list of the qualifying crimes, see INA §101(a)(15)(U)(iii). . 6 See INA §101(a)(51). 2
3
Prosecutorial Discretion: Certain Victims, Witnesses, and Plaintiffs Page 3 a result of domestic violence, sexual assault, trafficking, and other certain crimes. 7 A T nonimmigrant visa provides legal status to victims of severe forms of traffickini who assist law enforcement in the investigation and/or prosecution of human trafficking cases. ICE has important existing guidance regarding the exercise of discretion in these cases that remains in effect. Please review it and apply as appropriate. 9 Please also be advised that a flag now exists in the Central Index System (CIS) to identify those victims of domestic violence, trafficking, or other crimes who already have filed for, or have been granted, victim-based immigration relief. These cases are reflected with a Class of Admission Code "384." When officers or agents see this flag, they are encouraged to contact the local ICE Office of Chief Counsel, especially in light of the confidentiality provisions set forth at 8 U.S.C. § 1367. No Private Right of Action These guidelines and priorities are not intended to, do not, and may not be relied upon to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by any party in any administrative, civil, or criminal matter.
See INA §101(a)(15)(U). See INA §101(a)(15)(T). 9 See Memorandum from John P. Torres, Director, Office of Detention and Removal Operations and Marcy M. Forman, Director, Office of Investigations, Interim Guidance Relating to Officers Procedure Following Enactment of VAWA 2005 (Jan. 22, 2007). 7
8
Policy Number: 10075.1 FEA Number: 306·112·0026
Office ofthe Director
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 500 12th Street, SW WasWngton, D.C. 20536
u.s. Immigratio~
and Customs Enforcement June 17, 2011 MEMORANDUM FOR:
AU Field Office Directors All Special Agents in Charge All Chief Counsel
FROM:
John Mort Director
SUBJECT:
Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with the Civil hnmigration Enforcement Priorities of the Agency for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Aliens
Purpose This memorandum provides U.S. hnmigrationand Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel guidance on the exercise·ofprosecutorial discretion to ensure that the agency's immigration enforcement resources are focused on the agency's enforcement priorities. The memorandum also serves to make clear which agency employees may exercise prosecutorial discretion and what factors should be considered. This memorandum builds on several existing memoranda related to prosecutorial discretion with special emphasis on the following: • • • • • • • •
Sam Bernsen, Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) General Counsel, Legal Opinion Regarding Service Exercise of ProsecutoriaI Discretion (July 15,1976); Bo Cooper, INS General Counsel, INS Exercise ofProsecutorial Discretion (July 11, 2000); Doris Meissner, INS Commissioner, Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion (November 17, 2000); Bo Cooper, INS General Counsel, Motions to Reopen for Considerations of Adjustment of Status (May 17,2001); William J. Howard, Principal Legal Advisor, Prosecutorial Discretion (October 24, 2005); Julie L.Myers, Assistant Secretary, Prosecutorial and Custody Discretion (November 7, 2007); . . John Morton, Director, Civil Immigration Enforcement Priorities for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Aliens (March 2, 2011 );and John Morton, Director, Prosecutorial Discretion: Certain Victims, Witnesses, and Plaintiffs (June 17,2011).
www.ice.gov iSi
AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11061734. (Posted on 06/17/11)
Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with the Priorities ofthe Agency for the . Appreher;sion, Detention, and Removal ofAliens
The following memoranda related to prosecutorial discretion are rescinded: •
•
Johnny N; Williams, Executive Associate Commissioner (EAC) for Field Operations, Supplemental Guidance Regarding Discretionary Referrals for Special Registration (October 31, 2002); and Johnny N. Williams, EAC for Field Operations, Supplemental NSEERS Guidance for Call-In Registrants (January 8,2003).
Background One of ICE's central responsibilities is to enforce th~ nation's civil immigration laws in coordination with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Citizenship and . Immigration Services (USCIS). ICE, however, has limited resources to remove those illegally in the United States. ICE must prioritize the use of its enforcement personnel, detention space, and removal assets to ensure that the aliens it removes represent, as much as reasonably possible, the agency's enforcement priorities, namely the promotion of national security, border security, public safety, and the integrity ofthe immigration system. These priorities are outlined in the ICE Civil Immigration Enforcement Priorities memorandum of March 2,2011, which this memonindum is intended to support. Because the agency is confronted with more administrative violations than its resources can address, the agency must regularly exercise "prosecutorial discretion" if it is to prioritize its efforts. In basic terms, prosecutorial discretion is the authority of an agency charged with enforcing a law to decide to what degree to enforce the law against a particular individual. ICE, like anyother law enforcement agency, has prosecutorial discretion and may exercise'it in the ordinary course of enforcement1.When ICE favorably exercises prosecutorial discretion, it essentially decides not to assert the full scope of the enforcement authority available to the agency in a given case.
In the civil immigration enforcement context, the term "prosecutorial discretion" applies to a broad range of discretionary enforcement decisions, including but not limited to the following: • • • • • •
deciding to issue or cancel a notice of detainer; deciding to issue, reissue, serve, file, or cancel a Notice to Appear (NTA); focusing enforcement resources on particular administrative violations or conduct; deciding whom to stop, question, or arrest for an administrative violation; deciding whom to detain or to release on bond, supervision, personal recognizance, or other condition; seeking expedited removal or other forms of removal by means other thana formal removal proceeding in immigration coUrt;
I The.Meissner memorandum's standard for prosecutorial discretion in a given case turned principally on whether a substantial federal interest was present. Under this memorandum, standard is principally one of pursuing those Cases that meet the agency's priorities for federal immigration enforcement generally.
the
2
•
2E&
&2
AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11061734. (Posted on 06/17/11)
Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with the Priorities ofthe Agencyfor the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal ofAliens • • • • • •
settling or dismissing a proceeding; granting deferred action, granting parole, or staying a final order of removal; agreeing to voluntary departure, the withdrawal of an application for admission, or other action in lieu of obtaining a formal order of removal; pursuing an appeal; executing a removal order; and responding to or joining in a motion to reopen removal proceedings and to consider joining in a motion to grant relief or a benefit.
Authorized ICE Personnel Prosecutorial discretion in civil immigration enforcement matters is held by the Director2 and may be exercised, with appropriate supervisory oversight, by the following ICE employees according to their specific responsibilities and authorities: •
officers, agents, and their respective supervisors within Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) who have authority to institute immigration removal proceedings or to otherwise engage in civil immigration enforcement;
•
officers, special agents, and their respective supervisors within Homeland Sect¢.ty Investigations (HSI) who have authority to institute immigration removal proceedings or to otherwise engage in civil immigration enforcement;
•
attorneys and their respective supervisors within the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA) who have authority to represent ICE in immigration removal proceedings before the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR); and
•
the Director, the Deputy Director, and their senior staff.
ICE attorneys may exercise prosecutorial discretion in any immigration removal proceeding before EOIR, on referral of the case from EOIR to the Attorney General, or during the pendency ,of an appeal to the federal courts, including a proceeding proposed or initiated by CBP or USCIS. If an ICE attorney decides to exercise prosecutorial discretion to dismiss, suspend, or close a particular case or matter, the attorney should notify the relevant ERO, HSI, CBP, or USCIS charging official about the decision. In the event there is a dispute between the charging official and the ICE attorney regarding the attorney's decision to exercise prosecutorial diScretion, the ICE Chief Counsel should attempt to resolve the dispute with the local supervisors of the charging officiaL If local resolution is not possible, the matter should be elevated to the Deputy Director of ICE for resolution..
Delegation of Authority to the Assistant Secretary, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Delegation No. 7030.2 (November 13, 2004), delegating among other authorities, the authority to exercise prosecutorial discretion in . immigration enforcement matters (as defined in 8 U.S.C. § I 10 I (a)(17».
2
3
is
AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11061734. (Posted on 06/17/11)
Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with the Priorities ofthe Agencyfor the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal ofAliens
Factors to ConsiderWhen Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion When weighing whether an exercise of prosecutorial discretion may be warranted for a given . alien, ICE officers, agents,and attorneys should consider all relevant factors, including, but not limited to• • • •
•
• • • • • • • • • • • • •
•
the agency's civil immigration enforcement priorities; the person's length of presence in the United States, with particular consideration given to presence while in lawful status; the circumstances ofthe person's arrival in the United States and the manner ofhis or her entry,particularly if the alien came to the United States as a young child; the person's pursuit of education in the United States, with particular consideration given to those who have graduated from a U.S. high school or have successfully pursued or are pursuing a college or advanced degrees at a legitimate institution of higher education in the United States; whether the person, or the person's immediate relative,has served in the U.S. military, reserves, or national guard, with particular consideration given to those who served in combat; the person's criminal history, including arrests, prior convictions, or outstanding arrest warrants; the person's immigration history, including any prior removal, outstanding order of removal, prior denial of status, or evidence of fraud; whether the person poses a national security or public safety concern; the person's ties and contributions to the community, including family relationships; the person's ties to the home country and condition~ in the country; the person's age, with particular consideration given to minors andthe elderly; whether the person has a U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, child, or parent; whether the person is the primary caretaker of a person with a mental or physical disability, minor, or seriously ill relative; ; whether the person or the person's spouse is pregnant or nursing; whether the person or the person's spouse suffers from severe mental or physical illness; whether the person's nationality renders removal unlikely; whether the person is likely to be granted temporary or permanent status or other relief from removal, including as a relative of a U.S. citizen or permanent resident; whether the person is likely to be granted temporary or permanent status or other relief from removal, including as an asylum seeker, or a victim of domestic violence, human trafficking, or other crime; .and . whether the person is currently cooperating or has cooperated with federal, state or local law enforcement authorities, such as ICE, the U.S Attorneys or Department of Justice, the Department ofLabor, or National Labor Relations Board, among others.
This list is not exhaustive and no one factor is.determinative. ICE officers, agents, and attorneys should always consider prosecutorial discretion on a case-by-case basis. The decisions should be based on the totality of the circumstances, with the goal of conforming to ICE's enforcement priorities.
4
=
AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11061734. (Posted on 06/17/11)
Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with the Priorities ofthe Agency for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal ofAliens That said, there are certain classes of individuals that wat;rant particular care. As was stated in the Meissner memorandum on Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion, there are factors that can help ICE officers, agents, and attorneys identify these cases so thatthey can be reviewed as early as possible in the process. The following positive factors should prompt particular care and consideration: • • •. • • • • •
veterans and members ofthe U.S. armed forces; long-time lawful permanent residents; minors and elderly individuals; individuals present in the United States since childhood; pregnant or nursing women; victims of domestic violence; trafficking, or other serious crimes; individuals who suffer from a serious mental or physical disability; and individuals with serious health conditions.
In exercising prosecutorial discretion in furtherance ofICE's enforcement priorities, the following negative factors should also prompt particular care and consideration by ICE officers, agents, and attorneys:
• • • •
individuals who pose a clear risk to national security; serious felons, repeat offenders, or individuals with a lengthy criminal record of any kind; known gang members or other individuals who pose a clear danger to public safety; and individuals with an egregious record of immigration violations, including those with a record of illegal re-entry and those who have engaged in immigration fraud.
Timing While ICE may exercise prosecutorial discretion at any stage of an enforcement proceeding, it is generally preferable to exercise such discretion as early in the case or proceeding as possible in order to preserve government resources that would otherwise be expended in pursuing the enforcement proceeding. As was more extensively elaborated on in the Howard Memorandum on Prosecutorial Discretion, the universe of opportunities to exercise prosecutorial discretion is large. It may be exercised at any stage of the proceedings. It is also preferable for ICE officers, agents, and attorneys to consider prosecutorial discretion in cases without waiting for an alien or alien's advocate or counsel to request a favorable exercise of discretion. Although affirmative requests from an alien or his or her representative may prompt an evaluation of whether a favorable exercise of discretion is appropriate in a given case, ICE officers, agents, and attorneys should examine each such case independently to determine whether a favorable exercise of discretion may be appropriate. In cases where, based upon an officer's, agent's, or attorney's initial exaniination, an exercise of prosecutorial discretion may be warranted but additional information would assist in reaching a final decision, additional information may be requested from the alien or his or her representative. Such requests should be made in conformity with ethics rules governing
5
&L
=
AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11061734. (Posted on 06/17/11)
Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with the Priorities ofthe Agencyfor the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal ofAliens
communication with represented individuals3 and should always emphasize that, while ICE may be considering whether to exercise discretion in the case, there is no guarantee that the agency will ultimately exercise discretion favorably. Responsive information from the alien or his or her representative need not take any particular form and can range from a simple letter or e-mail message to a memorandum with supporting attachments. Disclaimer As there is no right to the favorable exercise of discretion by the agency, nothing in this memorandum should be construed to prohibit the apprehension, detention, or removal of any alien unlawfully in the United States or to limit the legal authority of ICE or any of its personnel to enforce federal immigration law. Similarly, this memorandum, which may be modified, superseded, or rescinded at any time without notice, is not intended to, does not, and may not be relied upon to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by any party in any administrative, civil, or criminal matter.
3 For
questions concerning such rules, officers or agents should consult their local Office of Chief Counsel.
6
AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11061734. (Posted on 06/17/11)
Alma David Rios & Cruz, P.S. 811 1st Ave, Ste. 340 Seattle, WA 98104
NOT DETAINED
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW IMMIGRATION COURT SEATTLE, WA In the Matter of: first name LAST NAME,
In removal proceedings
Immigration Judge Paul A. DeFonzo
) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
File No: A XXX-XXX-XXX
Next Hearing: ICH December 17, 2013 at 1:00 pm
RESPONDENT’S NON-OPPOSITION TO DHS MOTION TO ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSE
The respondent, first name LAST NAME, through undersigned counsel, hereby states his non-opposition to the DHS’ Motion to Administratively Close his removal proceedings, filed November 22, 2013. Respectfully submitted, this 10th Day of December, 2013.
____________________________ Alma David Attorney for Respondent
First name LAST NAME Name of Alien A XXX-XXX-XXX A# PROOF OF SERVICE
On 12/10/13 (date)
, I,
served a copy of this
and any attached pages to at the following address:
by
Signature
Alma David (name of person signing below) RESPONDENT’S NON-OPPOSITION TO DHS MOTION TO ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE (name of document) DHS-Office of Chief Counsel (name of party served) 1000 SECOND AVE., STE. 2900, SEATTLE, WA 98104 (address of party served) Hand Delivery (method of service)
12/10/13 Date
Alma David Rios & Cruz, P.S. 811 1st Ave, Ste. 340 Seattle, WA 98104
NOT DETAINED
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW IMMIGRATION COURT SEATTLE, WA In the Matter of: first name LAST NAME,
In removal proceedings
Immigration Judge Paul A. DeFonzo
) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
File No: A XXX-XXX-XXX
Next Hearing: ICH 01/10/14 at 8:30 am
RESPONDENT’S NON-OPPOSITION TO DHS MOTION TO DISMISS
The respondent, first name LAST NAME, through undersigned counsel, hereby states her non-opposition to the DHS’ Motion to dismiss her removal proceedings. Respectfully submitted, this 31st Day of December, 2013.
____________________________ Alma David Attorney for Respondent
First name LAST NAME Name of Alien A xxx-xxx-xxx A# PROOF OF SERVICE
On 12/31/13 (date)
, I,
served a copy of this
and any attached pages to at the following address:
by
Signature
Alma David (name of person signing below) RESPONDENT’S NON-OPPOSITION TO DHS MOTION TO DISMISS (name of document) DHS-Office of Chief Counsel (name of party served) 1000 SECOND AVE., STE. 2900, SEATTLE, WA 98104 (address of party served) Hand Delivery (method of service)
12/31/13 Date
Your Letterhead here Datei Address for Seattle (if case is docketed there): 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 2900, Seattle, WA 98104-1098 Address for Tacoma (if case is docketed there): Northwest Detention Center, 1623 East J Street, Suite 2, Tacoma, WA 98421 Address for Portland (if case is docket there): 1001 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 505, Portland, OR 97204
Re:
Request to administratively close the Matter of Fernando Gutierrez, A#200-123-456 pending before IJ Smith.
Do not use this template for joint motions to reopen or motions to dismiss. These requests may be addressed to Chief Counsel Raphael A. Sánchez; however, they will be assessed by Assistant Chief Counsels and his staff and with supervisory approval. Please make sure that requests to administratively close cases are addressed to the Chief Counsel’s Office and not to the relevant immigration courts if your request is for prosecutorial discretion. All requests should clearly state that you wish to pursue administrative closure of your client’s case instead of pursuing some form of lasting relief under the Immigration and Nationality Act. All requests should contain your client’s full name, and A number, and any rider’s names and A numbers. Please note that we will not reopen cases to administratively close them. Administrative closure is currently being offered for cases pending before the Immigration Judges in Seattle, Tacoma, and Portland. Please also note that the Office of Chief Counsel offers administrative closure, not only as an act of grace, but also as an act of efficiency. In that regard, the sooner an assessment is made to administratively close a case, the better. The Seattle Office of Chief Counsel has also declined to prosecute cases that are not a priority and where compelling humanitarian factors have been established. In other words, we
1
have rejected certain matters for filing with the relevant immigration court. Importantly, please do not ask whether we will administratively close a case based on hypothetical scenarios. We consider all relevant factors in making an assessment and we prefer to make such assessments with evidence before us. Please remember to sign and attach the proposed joint motion to administrative close your client’s case at the end of this document or a motion you have drafted if you do not wish to use the attached template. Please also delete the endnotes, which were created to assist you in determining what information is needed in making this request. I.
Arrests, criminal ii
history, and criminal convictions: I have consulted with Mr. Gutierrez concerning his background and confirm that he has not been arrested of any crime here in the United States or anywhere in the world. II.
Time in the United iii
States: Mr. Gutierrez entered the United States through Nogales, Arizona on or about June 15, 1996. He entered without permission. Mr. Gutierrez does not remember the exact date, but he remembers it was mid-June of 1996. He has never left the United States since entering in June of 1996, thus putting his time in the United States at 13 years and 6 months. III.
Immigration iv
History: Mr. Gutierrez was placed in removal proceedings by the Border Patrol. Mr. Gutierrez was the passenger of a vehicle pulled over near the border for a traffic infraction. He has had two master calendar hearings before IJ Iglesias. His next master calendar hearing is September 19, 2012. IV.
V.
Relief from Removal:v Mr. Gutierrez has not declared any forms of relief from removal, but may wish to pursue Cancellation of Removal for Certain Non-Permanent Residents. Although his two children are relatively healthy, they will experience hardship beyond the normal hardship associated with removal of a family member. Compelling Humanitarian Factors:
2
Please use the June 17, 2011 Morton memo’s factors as a general guide to determine eligibility for administrative closure. Please keep in mind that simply listing one or two factors does not guarantee administrative closure. Each Assistant Chief Counsel must weigh aggravating factors against mitigating factors. Mitigating factors can be summarized into nine discrete factors, which are: • Whether the person, or person’s immediate relative, has served in the United States military, military reserves, or national guard, with particular consideration given to those who served in combat;vi • Whether the person’s entered the United States as a child and graduated high school;vii • Whether the person entered the United States before age 16, graduated from a U.S. high-school and is currently pursuing a college or advanced degree at a legitimate institution of higher education in the United States; viii • Whether the person is elderly (generally, over 65), and has been physically present in the United States for ten or more years;ix • Whether the person has been a victim or domestic violence, human trafficking, or other serious crime in the United States;x • Whether the person has been a legal permanent resident for ten years or more;xi • Whether the person has a serious medical or physical condition;xii • Compelling long-term family ties;xiii and • Other compelling humanitarian factors not listed above.xiv Section V is probably the most critical for making an assessment to exercise prosecutorial discretion. Please follow the comments closely, be succinct, and provide relevant, probative evidence concerning those compelling factors. We realize that expressing the intimacy or closeness of a relationship is difficult. In such cases, we only ask that you provide statements concerning those relations, and whenever possible, documentation establishing the relationship, for example, a birth certificate, school records, a marriage certificate, etc.
3
VI.
Other Factors or Issues.xv Mr. Gutierrez also takes care of his 12 year old niece, Magdalena, who has Down syndrome. Although Magdalena is here illegally in the United States, she’s been here since age three. Magdalena’s mother, Mr. Gutierrez’ sister, passed away when Magdalena was two years old and the whereabouts of her father are unknown. Magdalena takes antibiotics for common ear infections associated with her Down syndrome. Magdalena also must visit an eye specialist frequently to treat a convergent squint, which is a common eye problem in children with Down syndrome. Mr. Gutierrez works second shift at a steel fabrication plant, and often uses the mornings to cover appointments for Magdalena’s healthcare related issues. Magdalena calls Mr. Gutierrez “papi” and considers him to be her father.
1) Timing: Our continuing review of cases will begin shortly and will end at the very beginning of summer. Our review of cases will begin with how they are scheduled with EOIR. If a case is currently scheduled for an individual hearing on December 13, 2012, we will probably not review it until the beginning of summer. In that regard, we ask for your patience. If the case is scheduled imminently, we will review it imminently. Our goal is to review all cases as quickly as possible, but we will be doing so in an organized manner. 2) Approval of Request: If the OCC agrees to administratively close the case after management approval and a negative national security check, he or she will sign your joint motion and file it with the court as soon as practical, but usually within two business days. National security checks are taking about one week to complete. Any appearance bonds associated with the case should be canceled by ERO; the OCC is not responsible for the return of any appearance bonds and we should not be asked about such issues as they are outside the chain of command and control of the OCC. 3) Declination of Request: All OCC attorneys are expected to provide reasons to you about why they declined to exercise prosecutorial discretion, but they may not necessarily do so in writing. If you want to know the basis for their decisionmaking, you may call the OCC attorney that made such a recommendation after you’ve received the declination in the mail. The declination letter must have the name of the recommending official. Because declinations are reviewed by an OCC manager, there will be no further review from this office unless there is a change in circumstances /facts. The change in
4
circumstances must be highlighted in any future request to review a previously decided case.
i
Please date your motion on the day it is filed with our office. We do accept fax and scanned copies, but your motion is expected to have clearly tabbed documents and an original signature on your proposed administrative closure order. ii Affirm that you have consulted with your client and that you affirm there are no arrests, other than an arrest for a civil immigration violation (arrests include arrests anywhere in the world, not just the United States); or Affirm that there are arrests, (if more than one, list them here), the date of those arrests, the initial charges, the underlying penal code allegedly violated, and what the disposition was, if known. Please note any collateral or post-‐conviction relief that is being sought. Please do not go into detail concerning the underlying facts of the case, as this may or may not be necessary. One or two sentences may suffice if the crime is relatively minor. If you wish to explain further, you may do so in Part VI. Please note that the Office of Chief Counsel must consider all law enforcement encounters, including dismissed cases, in order to determine whether it will exercise prosecutorial discretion.
iii
Time means continuous physical presence in any status including unlawful status with no unauthorized departures or reentries. Please state how long your client has been in the United States in years, and months. Please refrain from adding anything else, such as work history, church membership, volunteer services, etc. You may discuss those items in Part VI. Please do not submit any documents to establish physical presence or time in the United States. If the Chief Counsel’s Office has questions concerning presence in the United States, he or she may request additional documentation. iv
In one paragraph or less please state the immigration history of your client’s case. Many cases can be summarized in one sentence, for example: Mr. Gutierrez was placed initially into removal proceedings upon a referral of his asylum application to the Immigration Judge from the San Francisco Asylum Office and he has no other immigration history. In other cases, you may need to add more sentences, but please be succinct. You are encouraged to use bullets, if necessary, for example:
Placed in Removal Proceedings on July 6, 2003; Had a merits hearing on September 16, 2005 where his application for cancellation of removal was denied, but he was given voluntary departure until November 15, 2005; BIA affirmed IJ’s denial of cancellation of removal on February 14, 2007, but PFR filed with Ninth Circuit; Ninth Circuit remanded on March 21, 2009 because EOIR did not engage in fact finding of qualifying relative; Case has been remanded to the IJ where it is still pending. The next master calendar is scheduled for August 13, 2012.
Please do not submit any documents relating to the Immigration History of your client’s case because these documents can be fairly verified by the Chief Counsel’s Office.
5
v
Please state the forms of your relief your client wishes to pursue. If your client is ineligible for lasting immigration relief, state so. For each form of relief, please provide a short statement about that form of relief, for example: A: Asylum, Withholding, and CAT: My client fears returning to Mexico based on general country conditions. The state where he intends to live is notorious for violence. B: Cancellation of Removal, Part B: My client is prima facie eligible for cancellation of removal and expects to establish that his 8 year old US citizen son will experience exceptional and extremely unusual hardship because he will not have ready access to medical care for his asthma and his medication for ADHD. He also does not speak Spanish with the same level of fluency as a native speaker and will experience difficulties because he will be identified as an outsider. Please do not add any applications or documents in support of any applications for relief. If the Chief Counsel’s Office has questions concerning relief from removal, he or she may request additional documentation.
vi
Please provide proof of military service. If discharged, please include a copy of the DD-‐214 (Report of Separation). If the person is an immediate relative, please include proof of the relationship. Proof of combat, if applicable, should also be demonstrated. vii Proof of graduation from a US High School is required. Passing a General Educational Development test (GED) is also acceptable, but less of a mitigating factor. Proof of entry before age 16 is also required, but can be satisfied with elementary or middle school records. viii Required documentation is the same as above, except any entry before age 16 is acceptable. Please include proof of enrollment at an institution of higher learning. Please also include grades, and any other special accolades, such as scholarships, grants, activism in his or her intended field of study, etc. ix Please provide proof of age and documentation showing initial presence ten years ago or more, for example, a driver’s license issued by the State of Washington in 2001 will suffice. . If the Chief Counsel’s Office has questions concerning continuous presence in the United States for the past ten or more years, he or she may request additional documentation. x Please provide relevant and probative information concerning domestic violence, human trafficking, or another serious crime. Documentation should generally include hospital records, criminal complaints, police reports, psychological reports, proof of victim assistance services or funds, etc. If there is a U Visa application, you should submit that application unless you have privacy concerns, in which case, provide proof that the application was filed with the Vermont Service Center. xi Our records / A file will tell us whether your client is or isn’t a legal permanent resident; therefore, you should not generally submit anything concerning this factor unless DHS is alleging your client abandoned his status, in which case, you will need to establish presence, but I encourage you to submit the most relevant documents and then engage with the ACC about what other documents may be necessary. xii Please provide documentation concerning any serious medical or physical condition. For this mitigating factor, we are most concerned about whether the person can receive such care in his or her home country and what care is currently being provided in this country (frequency, nature, type, etc).
6
xiii
Please list the nature of the compelling tie, for example, if the person provides financial support to a child, but the child does not live with him or her, please state that as well as a description of the general relationship and its overall quality. One or two paragraphs should suffice. Please provide documentation for financial care or support. xiv Using this option is discouraged. Please use this option only if the other options above do not fit, even remotely. If you ultimately decide to use this option, please be succinct in the description and provide supporting documentation for anything that is not obvious from reviewing the A file. xv In this section, you are encouraged to explain in more detail any other compelling humanitarian factors. These may be factors that fall outside of the Morton memo, but you wish OCC to consider them. For example, compelling family ties means family ties to individuals that are either legal permanent residents or US Citizens. In the example I provide above, I note the serious medial issue of an undocumented child with Down syndrome. We certainly want to know about that.
7
Alma David Attorney for Respondent Rios & Cruz, P.S. 811 First Avenue, Suite 340 Seattle, WA 98104
NON-DETAINED
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION REVIEW OFFICE OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON ____________________________________ In re: ) ) first name LAST NAME, ) ) In removal proceedings. ) ____________________________________)
Immigration Judge Edward Kandler
File No. A XXX-XXX-XXX
Next Hearing: ICH 08/06/13 at 1:00 pm
RESPONDENT’S OPPOSITION TO DHS MOTION TO ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSE 1
The respondent, first name LAST NAME, through undersigned counsel, hereby states his opposition to the DHS’ Motion to Administratively Close his removal proceedings. Mr. LAST NAME’s application for Cancellation of Removal for Certain Non-Permanent Residents is currently pending before this Court, and he wishes to pursue such relief from removal. Respectfully submitted, this 1st Day of August, 2013.
____________________________ Alma David Attorney for Respondent
2
Proof of Service / Seattle, Washington Immigration Court First name LAST NAME (Name of alien or aliens) A XXX-XXX-XXX (A Number of alien or aliens)
On 08/01/2013, I, (date)
(printed name of person signing below)
served a copy of this RESPONDENT’S OPPOSITION TO DHS MOTION TO ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSE (name of document)
at the following address: Office of Chief Counsel DHS - Immigration and Customs Enforcement 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 2900 Seattle, WA 98104
by: □Mail □ Overnight Courier Hand delivery or: □ Served electronically on the Chief Counsel’s Office located at 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 2900 – Seattle, WA 98104 at
[email protected]
□ Placed in the ICE drop box adjacent to the EOIR Immigration Court in Seattle, WA ________________________ SIGNATURE
3
Manuel F. Rios Henry Cruz* Erica Schommer** Alma David*** Kati Ortiz Kristin Kyrka Brittan Schwartz Paula Martinez** *Also admitted in Texas (inactive) **Admitted in Texas ***Admitted in California
811 First Ave, Suite 340 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: (206) 749-5600 Fax: (206) 749-5800 Alt. Fax: (206) 299-4228 4008 S. Pine St. Tacoma, WA 98409 Phone: (253) 507-4735 Fax: (253) 507-4835 www.rioscruz.com
January 7, 2014 Hana Sato Assistant Chief Counsel Office of Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security – ICE 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 2900 Seattle, WA 98104 RE:
Request to administratively close case of First name LAST NAME, A XXX-XXX-XXX, currently pending before IJ DeFonzo
Dear Ms. Sato: I represent [first name LAST NAME (“Resp. Name”)] in his immigration case. My G-28 is on file with your office. Through this letter and attached documents, I am requesting that your office exercise discretion by agreeing to administratively close this case. [Resp. Name] is a 29 year old native and citizen of Mexico, who has lived in the United States since he entered without inspection in 2003. [Resp. Name] had been in the U.S. previously at the age of 14 when he entered in 1999. See, Supporting Documents (“Docs”) at 39-43. [Resp. Name] is not among DHS’ enforcement priorities: Although [Resp. Name] was convicted for a DUI, he has demonstrated that he is repentant for violating the law and completed alcohol treatment. [Resp. Name] has no other history of alcohol abuse and is regarded by his clients as reliable and hard-working. [Resp. Name] has resided in the United States for ten years. He has two United States Citizen (USC) children; his USC son has asthma; he has a large network of relatives with immigration status in the United States; and he is considered a hard worker and a valuable member of his community by those who know him. 1) CRIMINAL HISTORY [Resp. Name] has one criminal conviction: In August 2012, he was arrested for and charged with one count of DUI under RCW 46.61.502(1) in the District Court of Washington, Jefferson County. He pleaded not guilty to this charge, but was convicted by jury on May 13, 2013. He was sentenced to 364 days of jail time, with 362 days suspended for 24 months, and 2 days credit for time served. He was also ordered to pay fees and fines in the total amount of $1640.50, and was put on probation for 24 months, requiring him to complete a DUI victim’s panel and Alcohol and Drug information school, which he has already done. [Resp. Name]’s probation
runs until April 2015. Docs at 1-14. [Resp. Name] has no other criminal convictions. He was charged in 2005 with No Valid Operator’s License, but this charge was dismissed. Docs at 34-35. Moreover, [Resp. Name] has demonstrated his rehabilitation by pre-emptively attending a victim’s panel and alcohol school, and, as demonstrated in the letter he wrote, attached to this request, he has taken his misconduct very seriously and learned from it. Docs at 13-18. [Friend Name], a retired US Customs Senior Special Agent and an acquaintance of [Resp. Name]’s, confirms in his letter that [Resp. Name] took his conviction seriously and accepted full responsibility for his error in judgment. Numerous other letters from friends and acquaintances echo this sentiment. Docs at 19-33. 2) TIME IN THE UNITED STATES [Resp. Name] first came to the United States as a 14 year old child in 1999, but has lived continuously in the United States since 2003. Attached is a letter from his aunt verifying he lived with her from April of 2003, a letter demonstrating that he took ESL classes in 2003, and his driver’s license from November of 2004. Docs at 36-43. 3) IMMIGRATION HISTORY [Resp. Name] first came to the United States as a 14 year old child in 1999, but has lived continuously in the United States since 2003. He entered the United States without inspection. As a result of his criminal arrest in 2011, [Resp. Name] was turned over to ICE who placed him in removal proceedings. I-213; NTA. His first non-detained Master Calendar Hearing is scheduled for December 18, 2013 at 1:30 pm before IJ DeFonzo. 4) RELIEF FROM REMOVAL [Resp. Name] is not currently eligible for relief from removal, other than voluntary departure. Although he has two United States Citizen children, since he has been continuously physically present since 2003 and was served his NTA in 2011, he does not have the requisite time to qualify him for Cancellation of Removal. Moreover, his brother in law was recently murdered in Mexico, making [Resp. Name] afraid to return there; however, as he is currently unaware of the specific motives for his brother’s murder, he does not intend to file an I-589 application. At his first MCH, [Resp. Name] admitted the factual allegations in his NTA and conceded removability. He requested a continuance to await the adjudication of his administrative closure request and to await the enactment of CIR legislation. He is currently scheduled for a merits hearing on April 21, 2014 before IJ DeFonzo. 5) COMPELLING HUMANITARIAN FACTORS: LONG-TERM FAMILY TIES [Resp. Name] is married to [Wife Name], a Mexican national. Together they have three children.
The two youngest, a son [Son Name], born in 2007 and daughter [Daughter Name], born in 2009, are USCs. Docs at 45-46. [Son Name] suffers from acute asthma. He must use a rescue inhaler as needed and is required to follow up every six months to control his asthma. Docs at 47-48. Asencions aunt, [Aunt Name], is a legal permanent resident. Docs at 40-43. In her letter, [Wife Name] attests to the important roll [Resp. Name] plays in his children’s lives. He supports the children both emotionally and financially, and is always available to give the children a hug, according to [Wife Name]. Docs at 19-22. 6) OTHER FACTORS OR ISSUES In the United States, [Resp. Name] has worked hard to found a landscaping business in Sequim. He has learned English and takes particular care of senior citizens in the Sequim area, where many seniors have retired. He is highly regarded by the members of his community, many of whom have written thoughtful letters in support of his request to remain in the United States, stating that he is a responsible father and husband, a valued community member, and a skilled landscaper. Docs at 59-70. Should Comprehensive Immigration Reform Legislation come to pass, [Resp. Name] would likely be a candidate to apply for relief under this new law1. For the above reasons, I respectfully request that you agree to administratively close [Resp. Name]’s removal proceedings. If you have any questions or require any further information about this request, please do not hesitate to contact me at 206 749 5600 ext. 240, or at
[email protected]. Thank you very much for your consideration of this request. Sincerely,
Alma David Attorney at Law Rios & Cruz, P.S.
1
S.744, full text of bill available at: http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/legislation/immigration/EAS13500.pdf; list of amendments available at: http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/legislation/immigration/amendments.cfm.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS - TABLE OF CONTENTS Description
Pages
Respondent’s Criminal History and Rehabilitation Copy of JIS print out for Respondent .................................................................. Copy of the Jefferson County Court Docket, Citation, Amended Citation, Verdict Form, and Judgment and Sentence for case number C00862336, demonstrating on 08/11/2012 Respondent was charged with DUI; on 05/13/13 Respondent was found guilty by a jury trial and he was convicted; Respondent was ordered to serve 364 days of jail with 362 days suspended, to install ignition interlock for 6 months; to pay in fees and fines a total of $1,640.50; to attend victims panel, to obtain alcohol assessment and attend alcohol information classes; that Respondent complied with alcohol assessment, alcohol information school, and Victims Panel ...............................1-12 Copy of DUI Victim’s Impact Panel Verification of Attendance from Coastal Outreach Services, verifying Respondent’s attendance on 5/25/2013.................13 Copy of Certification of Completion from Trillium Treatment Center, Inc., showing Respondent completed an 8 hour Alcohol & Drug Information School .................................................................................................................14 Letter from Respondent in regards to his DUI conviction, demonstrating Respondent learned the consequences of drunk driving; that Respondent hasn’t drunk alcohol since the DUI accident, with certified English translation.15-18 Letter from [Wife Name], Respondent’s spouse, stating Respondent is not an alcoholic; that he made a mistake but he learned his lesson, with a certified English translation ..............................................................................................19-22 Letter from [Friend Name], US Customs Senior Special Agent (Retired), stating that Respondent accepted responsibility for his DUI and is a good and responsible community member ..........................................................................23-24 Letter from [Name], retired law enforcement officer, attesting to the lessons Respondent has learned from his DUI conviction ...............................................25 Letter from [Name], Respondent’s customer, stating Respondent is a repentant person; that Respondent will no longer drink alcohol .........................................26-27 Letter from [Name] & [Name], Respondent’s customers, stating Respondent realized driving under influence is dangerous; that Respondent is a wonderful person who contributed to the community...........................................................28
Letter from [Name] & [Name], explaining that his DUI became a life changing event for Respondent; that Respondent’s family & his children have learned the seriousness of drinking and driving; that Respondent is a good man and very important to their rural community ...............................................29 Letter from [Name] & [Name], stating Respondent had learned his lesson regarding drinking and driving ............................................................................30 Letter from [Name], Respondent’s customer, stating Respondent admitted his DUI was a big mistake; that in all of his interactions with Respondent he never saw any indication of alcohol problems.....................................................31 Letter from [Name], Respondent’s neighbor and customer, describing Respondent as reliable, punctual, that through many conversations with Respondent she knows that Respondent regrets the events of that evening [DUI] and that Respondent has learned his lesson and will not drink and drive again.....................................................................................................................32 Letter from [Name], daughter of [Name], Respondent’s neighbor and customer, stating she spoke to Respondent in regards to his situation and that she sensed Respondent’s regret about drinking and drinking..............................33 Letter from [Name], Clallam County District Court Administrator, stating the court records of case number C0XXXXX No Valid operating License are unavailable due to retention requirements ........................................................... 34 Copy of Clallam County District Court Docket case number C0XXXXX No Valid operating License, showing the charge was dismissed on 01/21/2005 and case was closed ............................................................................................. 35 Documents Relating to Respondent’s Immigration History/Time in the United States Copy of Respondent’s Birth Certificate, with certified English translation ........36-38 Letter from [Name], Adult Basic Ed Instructor, Peninsula College, verifying that Respondent enrolled in ESL classes in the fall of 2003................................39 Letter from [Name], Respondent’s LPR aunt, verifying that she lived with him from 2003-2004, with certified English translation and copy of her LPR card...40-43 Copy of Respondent’s Washington Identification Card, issued on 10/23/2004 ...........................................................................................................44
Family ties in the United States Copy of Birth Certificate for [Name], Respondent’s USC son ...............................................................................................................45 Copy of Birth Certificate for [Name], Respondent’s USC daughter.......................................................................................................46 See also, letter from [Name], LPR aunt. Other factors/Discretionary Documents Individual Health Care Plan from Olympic Community Action Programs Early Childhood Services for [Name], Respondent’s USC son, regarding his asthma condition ............................................................................ 47 Letter from [Name], MD, Pediatrician with Peninsula Children’s Clinic, Inc., stating that [Name], Respondent’s son, has been the clinic’s patient since his birth; that in the past Guillermo received medication to control asthma and used a rescue inhaler; that currently [Name] needs to be evaluated to assess his asthma every six months ................................................................................48 Certificate of 2 years completion of Head Start Program for [Name], Respondent’s daughter, dated 06/06/2008...........................................................49 Certificate of Participation for Respondent and [Name], Respondent’s wife, for their support of Head Start Program, issued 06/06/2008, with certified English translation ...............................................................................................50-52 Kindergarten Diploma from Greywolf Elementary School for [Name], issued on 6/16/2010 ........................................................................................................53 Ties to the Community Copy of Vehicle Certificates of Title for three vehicles ......................................54-56 Copy First Federal Bank Account Statement for Respondent, dated 04/01/13 ...57 Copy of Power Bill from PUD ............................................................................58 Letter from [Name], Respondent’s acquaintance of nine years, characterizing him as a reliable and hardworking person ..........................................................59 Letter from [Name]and [Name], Respondent’s customers, stating Respondent is a conscientious, hardworking family man, who contributes to the society......60
Letter from [Name]and [Name], Respondent’s customers, stating Respondent has strong work ethics and dedication; that Respondent is an extremely hard worker; that Respondent is an exceptional father who makes sure his children have what they need to be successful students ....................................................61 Letter from [Name] and [Name], Respondent’s customers, describing Respondent as an extremely dependable and very honest person, with outstanding an work ethic ....................................................................................62 Letter from [Name] and [Name], Respondent’s customers, stating they have known Respondent for 4 years through Church and Business ............................63 Letter from [Name] and [Name], Respondent’s customers, stating they have used Respondent’s services as a landscaper to the benefits of their property; that Respondent is a valuable member for their community - fair and trustworthy; that they have never found anyone else as capable and hardworking .........................................................................................................64 Letter from [Name], Respondent’s neighbor and customer, stating Respondent’s dependability and knowledge help her maintain her property and are blessings to her and many other clients...................................................65 Letter from [Name] and [Name], characterizing Respondent as integral and honest; as a disciplined and ethical worker; that they vouch for Respondent’s character and moral values............................................................66 Letter from [Name] and [Name], Respondent’s friends and customers, describing Respondent as professional, courteous, hardworking and very honest; that Respondent is a wonderful addition to their community ...........................................................................................................67 Letter from [Name] and [Name], Respondent’s neighbors and customers, charactering Respondent as trustworthy, honest and dependable, as a desirable member of their community.................................................................................68 Letter from [Name], stating that Respondent is responsible, hard working, and a dedicated family member..................................................................................69 Letter from [Name], recommending Respondent ................................................70 Copies of Respondent’s money transfer receipts to Mexico to his parents and his wife’s parents in Mexico ................................................................................71-75
Manuel F. Rios Henry Cruz* Erica Schommer** Alma David*** Kati Ortiz Kristin Kyrka Brittan Schwartz Paula Martinez** *Also admitted in Texas (inactive) **Admitted in Texas ***Admitted in California
811 First Ave, Suite 340 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: (206) 749-5600 Fax: (206) 749-5800 Alt. Fax: (206) 299-4228 4008 S. Pine St. Tacoma, WA 98409 Phone: (253) 507-4735 Fax: (253) 507-4835 www.rioscruz.com
January 13, 2014 Anne McElearney Assistant Chief Counsel Office of Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security – ICE 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 2900 Seattle, WA 98104 RE:
Request to administratively close case of First name LAST NAME A XXX-XXX-XXX, currently pending before IJ Josephson
Dear Ms. McElearney: I represent [first name LAST NAME (“Resp. Name”)] in her immigration case. Through this letter and attached documents, I am requesting that your office exercise discretion by administratively closing her removal proceedings. [Resp. Name] is a 66-year old native and citizen of Mexico, who is not among DHS’ enforcement priorities: though she did reenter the United States in 2000 after being expeditiously removed, she does not have a criminal history; she has resided in the United States for over thirteen years; she has a large network of family members with immigration status in the United States; and she is considered a devoted mother and grandmother, who is the primary caregiver for her disabled adult son. 1) CRIMINAL HISTORY [Resp. Name] has no criminal history. I have confirmed this with my client, and her I-213 reflects the same. 2) TIME IN THE UNITED STATES [Resp. Name] attempted to enter the United States in April 2000, using an I-551 that was not lawfully issued to her. See, Supporting Documents (“Docs”) at 4. She was questioned at the border and admitted that the card was not hers; thus, she was expeditiously removed. Id. She reentered the United States through San Ysidro, California on or about May 2000, without inspection, and has not departed since, putting her time in the United States at nearly 14 years. See, I-213; NTA.
3) IMMIGRATION HISTORY [Resp. Name] attempted to enter the United States in April 2000, using an I-551 that was not lawfully issued to her. She was questioned at the border and admitted that the card was not hers; thus, she was expeditiously removed. She re-entered the United States through San Ysidro, California on or about May 2000, without inspection, and has not departed since, putting her time in the United States at nearly 14 years. See, Docs at 4; NTA; I-213. [Resp. Name] was placed in removal proceedings by ICE on August 25, 2012 and charged with being removable under INA §212(a)(6)(A)(i) and INA §212(a)(9)(C)(i)(II). See, NTA. [Resp. Name] was apprehended at the Blaine, WA port of entry in a vehicle that mistakenly crossed into Canada and returned to the U.S. I-213. She was transferred to NWDC in Tacoma, WA after her arrest. After a bond hearing on October 11, 2012, she was released on a $7,500.00 bond. She had two detained master calendar hearings on September 18, 2012, and October 1, 2012. Her first non-detained next master calendar hearing is January 28, 2014 before IJ Josephson. 4) RELIEF FROM REMOVAL [Resp. Name] is not eligible for any substantive relief from removal. She does not have a qualifying relative for purposes of Cancellation of Removal. While she is afraid of the violence plaguing Mexico and specific harm from her mother in law, she does not intend to submit an application for asylum or related relief. She is otherwise eligible for Voluntary Departure. 5) COMPELLING HUMANITARIAN FACTORS: LONG-TERM FAMILY TIES/ELDERLY RESPONDENT WITH LONG RESIDENCE IN UNITED STATES [Resp. Name] is the primary care provider for her adult son, [Son Name], who suffers from epilepsy and development disability. Docs at 14-16; 37-57. [Son Name] receives constant medical treatment for his frequent tonic-clonic seizures, which occur three to four times a month, and are characterized by stiffening of the joints, violent involuntary muscle contractions, occasional loss of consciousness and loss of breathing. Id. [Son Name] takes prescription medication in order to control his condition. His treatment is provided by the San Diego Regional Center, a private 501 (c)(3) that serves persons with developmental disabilities in San Diego County. Id. [Resp. Name] provides around the clock care for [Son Name], ensuring that he receives proper medical care, filling and dispensing his medication, arranging transportation to his medical appointments, preparing his meals, assisting with his laundry, and providing other in-home
support in order to provide [Son Name] with a safe and nurturing home environment. Id. [Son Name]’s case managers and health care providers acknowledge that without [Resp. Name]’s assistance, he would not be able to receive the kind of individualized care that enable him to lead a healthy and productive life. Her family and friends recognize the selfless devotion that [Resp. Name] has towards [Son Name], and admire her strength of character and dedication. Id. [Resp. Name] has many relatives who live in the U.S., both U.S. citizens and Legal Permanent Residents. She lives in San Diego, California with her LPR sister and U.S. Citizen brother in law. She has eight children who live in the U.S., two of whom are in the process of adjusting status. Nine of her grandchildren are U.S. citizens. She also has thirteen nephews and nieces who are U.S. citizens, and four who are LPRs. Most of her family lives in the San Diego area, with the exception of three daughters and their families who live in North Carolina, two sons who live in Washington State, and a daughter who lives in Las Vegas, NV. Only two of her children live in Mexico after being removed from the U.S. Docs at 5-36. [Resp. Name] has a large network of extended family in the San Diego area that she depends on for support. Id. Moreover, [Resp. Name] is elderly, has resided in the United States for nearly 14 years, and she receives treatment a community clinic in San Diego for hypertension. Docs at 59.
6) OTHER FACTORS OR ISSUES Because most of her family lives in the U.S., [Resp. Name] would face hardship upon return to Mexico because she would have to endure the separation from her children, grandchildren, sister, and the rest of her large extended family in the U.S. [Resp. Name] has developed a close relationship with her family in the U.S. during the thirteen years that she has lived here, and she has been a constant presence in the lives of her children and grandchildren. Docs at 5-51. [Resp. Name] has lived continuously in the San Diego area since coming to the U.S. in 2000. She has been a very devoted mother and grandmother, as well as a very devout Christian, who lives her beliefs and sets a good example for her family. Id. Despite her limited age and her responsibilities to her son [Son Name], she donates both time and money to her church. Docs at 58. [Resp. Name] poses no threat to her community, is not an ICE priority, and has compelling equities. Her advanced age, length of residence in the U.S., large extended family and support network in the U.S., and her duties as primary caregiver to her son [Son Name] all weigh in favor of a positive grant of discretion.
Should Comprehensive Immigration Reform Legislation come to pass, [Resp. Name] would likely be a candidate to apply for relief under this new law1. For the above reasons, I respectfully request that you agree to administratively close [Resp. Name]’ removal proceedings. If you have any questions or require any further information about this request, please do not hesitate to contact me at 206 749 5600 ext. 240, or at
[email protected]. Thank you very much for your consideration of this request. Sincerely,
Alma David Attorney at Law Rios & Cruz, P.S.
1
S.744, full text of bill available at: http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/legislation/immigration/EAS13500.pdf; list of amendments available at: http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/legislation/immigration/amendments.cfm.
Raphael Sánchez Chief Counsel Gregory Fehlings Deputy Chief Counsel [TRIAL ATTORNEY ASSIGNED] [ASSISTANT CHIEF COUNSEL/SENIOR ATTORNEY] U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement U.S. Department of Homeland Security [ADDRESS] [ADDRESS] [PHONE NUMBER]
[YOUR NAME] [YOUR LAW FIRM] [YOUR ADDRESS] [YOUR ADDRESS] [YOUR PHONE NUMBER]
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION REVIEW OFFICE OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE [CITY, STATE] ____________________________________ In re: ) ) File No. [A XXX-XXX-XXX] [first name LAST NAME], ) ) In removal proceedings. ) ____________________________________)
Immigration Judge [IJ NAME]
Next Hearing: [MCH/ICH DATE TIME]
JOINT MOTION TO ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE PROCEEDINGS
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Department), and the respondent(s), by and through their respective undersigned counsel, jointly move the Immigration Judge to administratively close the instant proceedings in the above-captioned matter(s). As the Board of Immigration Appeals has explained, administrative closure is an administrative convenience “used to temporarily remove a case from an Immigration Judge’s active calendar or from the Board’s docket,” but “does not result in a final order.” Matter of Avetisyan, 25 I&N Dec. 688, 692, 695 (BIA 2012). At any time when either party wishes to place a matter back on the docket for active consideration, that party may file a motion to recalendar. See, e.g., Matter of Avetisyan, 25 I&N Dec. 688, 695 (BIA 2012); Matter of Wang, 23 I&N Dec. 924, 925 (BIA 2006); Matter of Cervantes-Torres, 21 I&N Dec. 351, 352 (BIA 1996). In the instant matter, the parties have concluded that it is in their best interest that proceedings be administratively closed. Should either party wish to place this matter back on the active calendar or docket, that party will file a motion to recalendar with this Court. Moreover, notwithstanding any administrative closure of these proceedings, the respondent(s) acknowledge(s) his/her/their obligation to timely notify the Department and Immigration Court of each change of address and new address, consistent with section 265 of the Immigration and Nationality Act and 8 C.F.R. § 1003.15(d)(2). Based upon the foregoing, the parties request that the Immigration Judge grant this joint motion to administratively close proceedings. Attached, for the Immigration Judge’s convenience, is a proposed order relating to this motion.
Respectfully submitted,
On behalf of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
On behalf of the respondent,
_________________________________ [TRIAL ATTORNEY ASSIGNED] [ASSISTANT CHIEF COUNSEL/SENIOR ATTORNEY] [ADDRESS] [ADDRESS]
___________________________ [YOUR NAME] [YOUR ADDRESS] [YOUR ADDRESS] [YOUR ADDRESS]
Date:
Date:
United States Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Office of the Immigration Judge [CITY, STATE] In the Matter of: [first name LAST NAME]
A Number: [A XXX-XXX-XXX]
ORDER OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE: Upon consideration of the Joint Motion to Administratively Close Proceedings, the Court states the following: 1.
The parties have agreed to administrative closure of the instant proceedings.
2.
Other:______________________________________________________________.
THEREFORE, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the motion be: [ ] GRANTED. These proceedings are hereby administratively closed upon the joint consent and motion of the parties. Proceedings may be recalendared at any time upon either party’s motion, and this order does not constitute a final judgment rendered on the merits of these proceedings. [ ] DENIED.
Date: [IJ NAME] Immigration Judge
Certificate of Service This document was served by: [ ] Mail [ ] Personal Service To: [ ] Alien [ ] Alien c/o Custodial Officer [ ] Alien’s Atty/Rep [ ] DHS Date: ____________________ By: Court Staff _________________
REQUEST FOR AN ACCELERATED RESOLUTION OF AN INDIVIDUAL OR MASTER CALENDAR HEARING SCHEDULED WITHIN THREE MONTHS Attorney’s Name: Alma David, Rios & Cruz, P.S. Client’s Name and Alien Number: first name LAST NAME, Axxx-xxx-xxx Dear Chief Counsel Sánchez: I am requesting that my client’s case be resolved under SmART (Smart Accelerated Resolutions Team). I hereby confirm the following:
My client has been fingerprinted within the past 12 months on April 5, 2013.
My client’s case is low priority;
My client’s case is currently scheduled for an Individual hearing in Seattle within three months of this request. That Individual hearing date is Thursday, February 6, 2014 with Immigration Judge Kenneth Josephson.
My client has an application for lasting relief, or alternatively, my client requests prosecutorial discretion in the form of administrative closure or dismissal. (administrative closure not applicable to detained aliens)
(Where lasting relief is sought) I do not wish to have a full merits hearing and I believe my client’s case can be resolved on a written record or with very limited questions to reach a final resolution of the matter.
I am willing to assist in obtaining as quickly as possible any additional written documents such as background evidence, affidavits, taxes, police reports, etc.
I understand that this is merely a request for an expedited resolution of my client’s case, but this request does not guarantee any results, nor does it bind the immigration court in any way.
If the OCC agrees to resolve this case, and the immigration court agrees to an accelerated resolution, I realize that I may be required to appear in person and with my client on very short notice.
Summary of my client’s case and why I feel it can be resolved in an accelerated manner:
My client is a 36 year old native and citizen of Mexico who first entered the United States in 1994, last entered the United States in 2009, and has lived in the United States continuously since 1995 . He was placed in deportation proceedings in 1994and ordered deported in absentia in 1995. In 2012, he came into immigration custody after a traffic stop. He reopened his deportation proceedings. He is applying for Suspension of Deportation; his statutory eligibility is addressed in a brief, which I am also submitting today. RESP has been married since 2003 to WIFE NAME, an LPR, and together, they have two USC children, DAUGHTER (age 9) and SON (age 6). See, Tab C. WIFE suffers from depression and anxiety, and has been in treatment for these conditions since 2008. Depending on the severity of her symptoms, which are exacerbated by stress, she takes anti-depressants. See, Tab D.
Both of RESP’s USC children suffer from medical problems. DAUGHTER suffers from moderate-severe dermatitis, for which she takes medication. When she has flare-ups, she often suffers from skin infections. Her dermatitis is exacerbated by stress, and when RESP was detained, Berenice’s skin became so inflamed, that she had open sores on her legs, arms and head. See, Tab D. SON. also suffers from skin problems, folliculitis and follicular eczema, for which he requires regular doctor’s visits. SON also has an IEP for a communication disorder, and receives specialized instruction through the Beaverton School District. See, Tab D. WIFE, in her letter, explains RESP’s devotion to and involvement in raising their children and helping them achieve their educational goals. Although RESP has a criminal history, including an arrest (that resulted in a diversion) for DUI from 2000 and a conviction for Theft 3 from 2001, he has submitted proof of rehabilitation, along with a large volume of good moral character evidence. See, Tab B. WIFE has a large family in the United States, and many of her family members, who have legal status, have submitted letters in support of RESP’s application. See Tab E. In light of the volume of documentary evidence regarding the hardship and positive discretionary factors in this case, my sense is that Judge Josephson would be inclined to grant relief in this case. My request is therefore that DHS stipulate to a grant of relief in this case Thank you for your consideration, and please let me know if you require any additional documentation to evaluate this request. Sincerely,
Alma David, Rios & Cruz, P.S.
REQUEST FOR AN ACCELERATED RESOLUTION OF AN INDIVIDUAL OR MASTER CALENDAR HEARING SCHEDULED WITHIN THREE MONTHS Attorney’s Name: Alma David, Rios & Cruz, P.S. Client’s Name and Alien Number: first name LAST NAME, A xxx-xxx-xxx Dear Chief Counsel Sánchez: I am requesting that my client’s case be resolved under SmART (Smart Accelerated Resolutions Team). I hereby confirm the following:
My client has been fingerprinted within the past four weeks on September 16, 2013.
My client’s case is low priority;
My client’s case is currently scheduled for a merits hearing in Seattle within three months of this request. That merits hearing date is Wednesday, October 23, 2013 with Immigration Judge Kenneth Josephson.
My client has an application for lasting relief, or alternatively, ☐ my client requests prosecutorial discretion in the form of administrative closure or dismissal. (administrative closure not applicable to detained aliens)
(Where lasting relief is sought) I do not wish to have a full merits hearing and I believe my client’s case can be resolved on a written record or with very limited questions to reach a final resolution of the matter.
I am willing to assist in obtaining as quickly as possible any additional written documents such as background evidence, affidavits, taxes, police reports, etc.
I understand that this is merely a request for an expedited resolution of my client’s case, but this request does not guarantee any results, nor does it bind the immigration court in any way.
If the OCC agrees to resolve this case, and the immigration court agrees to an accelerated resolution, I realize that I may be required to appear in person and with my client on very short notice.
Summary of my client’s case and why I feel it can be resolved in an accelerated manner:
This is a Non-LPR Cancellation case for a Mixteco client from Oaxaca, Mexico. He entered EWI in February 2000 and has not departed the US. Physical Presence proofs are in the E42B submission and in the supporting documents attached here (“Docs”) at 1-24. He is married to a Mixteco woman with no status, and he has 7 children, 5 of whom are USCs (and one of whom, Daniel, is his step-child). They are: NAME, age 13; NAME, age 10; NAME, age 6; NAME, age 4; and NAME, age 1. Docs at 54-68. NAME, who is about to turn 11, suffers from ongoing medical problems, including chronic stomach pain and nausea, the cause of which remains unknown. Docs at 69-108. The children who are of school age are enrolled in school. Docs at 57, 64-65. Tiburcio is the sole financial provider for the family. Docs at 66-67. RESP hails from a rural, impoverished region of Mexico, and he and his wife primarily speak Mixteco. E42B.
RESP has one conviction for DUI from 2012, pursuant to which he was placed into removal proceedings. He pleaded guilty, was convicted and sentenced to 2 days of jail time, to pay fees and fines in the amount of $3090, and was put on probation for two years, which was extended to three years, and includes the requirement to obtain alcohol treatment, and to attend a victim’s panel. Thus far, has he made payments towards his fees and fines. Docs at 2553. At the same time as he was charged with DUI, he was also charged with DWLS, which charge was dismissed. Id. In 2006, he was charged with criminal trespass and theft, to which he pleaded not guilty, and which charges were dismissed. All supporting documents are in the prehearing submission. Id. I am submitting supportive letters from his family members, as well as from his employer. Docs at 54-55, 58, 62, 6667, 109-111. In light of the fact that the client and his family will have to return to a particularly impoverished part of Mexico, the client’s indigenous background, and due to NAME’s ongoing medical problems, and as there is no serious criminal history, I believe the Judge Josephson will grant this case. Moreover, it is often difficult for the court to find an interpreter for the particular dialect of Mixteco that this client speaks (one has been requested for the ICH). My request is therefore that DHS stipulate to hardship in this case. Thank you for your consideration, and please let me know if you require any additional documentation to evaluate this request. Sincerely,
Alma David, Rios & Cruz, P.S.
REQUEST FOR AN ACCELERATED RESOLUTION OF AN INDIVIDUAL OR MASTER CALENDAR HEARING SCHEDULED WITHIN THREE MONTHS Attorney’s Name: Client’s Name and Alien Number: Dear Chief Counsel Sánchez: I am requesting that my client’s case be resolved under SmART (Smart Accelerated Resolutions Team). I hereby confirm the following:
☐
My client has been fingerprinted within the past four weeks on Date.
☐
My client’s case is low priority;
☐
My client’s case is currently scheduled for a Choose an item. hearing in Choose an item. within three months of this request. That Choose an item. hearing date is Date with Immigration Judge Choose an item..
☐
My client has an application for lasting relief, or alternatively, ☐ my client requests prosecutorial discretion in the form of administrative closure or dismissal. (administrative closure not applicable to detained aliens)
☐
(Where lasting relief is sought) I do not wish to have a full merits hearing and I believe my client’s case can be resolved on a written record or with very limited questions to reach a final resolution of the matter.
☐
I am willing to assist in obtaining as quickly as possible any additional written documents such as background evidence, affidavits, taxes, police reports, etc.
☐
I understand that this is merely a request for an expedited resolution of my client’s case, but this request does not guarantee any results, nor does it bind the immigration court in any way.
☐
If the OCC agrees to resolve this case, and the immigration court agrees to an accelerated resolution, I realize that I may be required to appear in person and with my client on very short notice.
Summary of my client’s case and why I feel it can be resolved in an accelerated manner:
My client is from India; he entered on a B-2 visa in 1998. He has never left this country. He’s prima-facie eligible for cancellation of removal, and he deserves it as a matter of discretion because: he has three USC children, one of whom was born with a congenital heart defect called Atrial Septal Defect which requires open heart surgery, but the prognosis should be favorable after surgery. He is a home owner and has paid his taxes, all of which is evidenced by our submission packet of March 12, 2012, as is his child’s need for medical treatment; therefore, I am not resubmitting them with this request. My client has been arrested for DUI in 1999, but received a rehabilitative disposition and completed with success all court requirements. He has not been arrested since, and because he has been fingerprinted recently, you should have this evidence. My client and I believe this is a good case to grant cancellation. We wish for an accelerated resolution in this matter notwithstanding the impending cancellation cap and agree to keep fingerprints current (reprints every 15 months)
