Montierh, Eric

Frager Suton Haupt, PLLC

2 International Plaza Dr., Suite 810
Nashville, TN 37217
U.S. Department of Justice
Executive Ofce fr Immigration Review
Board of Immigration Appeals
Ofce of the Clerk
5107 lelbur Pike, Suite 2000
Fffs Church. Virginia 20530
OHS/ICE Ofce of Chief Counsel MEM
167 N. Main St., Suite 737 A
Memphis, TN 38103
Name: RAMOS NAJERA, CRISOFORO A 200-945-567
Date of this notice: 6/27/2014
Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-refrenced case.
Enclosure
Panel Members:
Manuel, Elise
Hofman, Sharon
Grant, Edward R.
Sincerely,
Do c t
Donna Carr
Chief Clerk
williame
Userteam: Docket
For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Crisoforo Ramos-Najera, A200 945 567 (BIA June 27, 2014)
U.S. Depaent of Juce
EeOfc fr Igon Rew
Don o te B o Imon Ap
FalCu Vu 20530
File: A00 945 567 -Memphis, T1
I re: CRSOFORO RA
I ROVAL PROCEIGS
APEAL
Dae:
ON BELF OF RSPONET: Erc Mont Esquire
ON BELF OF DHS: Jonathan M. Lacomb
Assistant Chief Counsel
APLICATON: Contnuance; volu depae
JUN
2 'I 20Vi
The respondent, a natve and citizn of Mexico, h fle a tmely appeal of the Immigtion
Judge's decision date Agst 28, 2013, which denie his request fr a cnnuance and his
reue for voluny depa. The reponde ha fle a brief on appeal. The Depaen of
Homelad Se (HS) h fle a motion fr sm af ace which includes an
oppstion t the app on te meits. Te rerd will b rmande.
Te fc fndings of the Immigaton Judge ae revewe to deteine wether the a
"clealy eroneus." 8 C.F.R 1003.l(d)(3)(i). All other issues i apeals fom decisions of
Immigon Judges, including legal ad discretona deteminations and applictions of law t
fac ae reiee de novo. 8 C.F.R 1003.l(dX3)(ii).
We ae w the Immigation Judge's cnclusion tht the reponden file t eblish
god cse fr a cntnuanc in his cse to the ee i w base slely on the speulaive
possibility of cmprehensive immigation refor being pase by Congess (esp. Br. a 3-4; I.I.
at 2-3).
S
ee 8 C.F.R 1003.29; Maer of
S
ibrn, 18 IN Dec. 354, 355 (IA 1983).
S
ee
genrall Maer of Hahi, 24 IN De. 785 (IA 2009) (regading facors t cnside in
reets fr cnces, epeially the appaet ulte likelihood of scs).
Howee, we do not ae wth the Imigon Judge's denial of the rndet's reue
fr pos-cnclusion voluny dea under seon 240B(b)(I)() of the Act,
8 U.S.C. 1229c(b)(l)() (I.I. a 2-3). The Immigaton Judge stated that deial was ness
pursuat t 8 C.F.R 1240.26(c)(2), bes the rspondet h sbmite a photocpy of pa
of a passpor but h not preente te enre org paspor t OHS fr inspetion on or
befre the date of the he (I.J. a 2-3; Eh. 3; Tr. a 54).
A repondent is eligble fr post-cnclusion voluntary deaure if he h esblishe by clea
ad cnvincing evidenc that he h te mens t depa the Unite Staes ad inends to do so.
S
ee 240B(b)(l)(D) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1229c)(l)(). 8 C.F.R 1240.26c)(2) se t
1 Proc gs befr the Immigion Judge in this mate wee cmplee in Memphis,
Tenese , though vide cnfenc pu to son 240(b)(2)(A)(iii) of te Act.
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Crisoforo Ramos-Najera, A200 945 567 (BIA June 27, 2014)
A00 945 567
ec a oes prvde in son 1240.26(b)(3), cle and cnvincing evdence of the
mens to dea shall include in all cses presenon by the alien of a passpor or other tavel
docmenon, ad the OHS sl have fll_ opprunity to inspec ad photocpy the
documenon, ad challenge is athenticity or sfciency befre voluna deare is gante.
On appe, the ronde ages t he h 60 days t preent the orgnal passpor t OH,
pu to te prvisions cntne in 8 C.F.R 1240.26(b)(3)(ii) (esp. Br. a 3-8). We ae.
It is undisute t the reone hee did not bring a valid Mexc paspor or tavel
docent t the heg, statng that his paspor wa at his home ad he h not brought it wth
him (I.I. a 3; Tr. a 53). The OHS opps a g of pos-cnclusion volu deare,
satng that it wishe to inspect the passpor pror to the Immigaon Judge gting such relief
(I.I. a 3; Tr. a 54). Neithe DHS nor the Immigaton Judge queone the athecity or
validity of the repnden's paspor. We fnd that the Imigaton Judge did have diseon to
gt a additonal period fr pri on of a valid orgna passpor to the OHS fr inspeion.
We fd that the Immigon Judge impropely denie volunta dearre on Augst 28, 2013.
Acorgly, the fllowing orer wll b ete.
ORE Te rerd is remade fr fher prcgs ad te ent of a ne desion
consisent wth the foregoing opinion.
2
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Crisoforo Ramos-Najera, A200 945 567 (BIA June 27, 2014)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION COURT
MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE
VIA TELEPHONE TO NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE
File: A200-945-567
August 28, 2013
In the Matter of
CRISOFORO RAMOS-NAJERA
)
)
)
)
IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
RESPONDENT
GROUNDS: Section 212(a)(6)(A)(i) - alien present without being admitted or
paroled.
APPLICATIONS: Continuance; post-completion voluntary departure.
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ERIC MONTIERTH
Frager, Sutton, Haupt
ON BEHALF OF DHS: JONATHAN M. LARCOMB
ORDER AND DECISION
3
Respondent is a native and citizen of Mexico. Based upon admissions that were
made at an earlier Master Calendar hearing, the Court in Houston sustained the charge.
Respondent came before the Memphis Immigration Cour upon change of venue,
and seeks today two forms of relief. By way of background, respondent appeared
before the Court on August 7. 2012, and today is August 28, 2013. At the last setting of
the case, the Court gave respondent an opportunity to file all applications today. The
Court will sua sponte mark the order changing venue from Houston to Memphis as
Exhibit 2, the Notice to Appear having previously been marked as Exhibit 1.
1
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Respondent has filed a motion at Exhibit 3. Respondent basically wants a
continuance while the Congress of the United States takes some action or no action on
Immigration reform. Respondent states, through counsel, that some sections of this
proposed bill might benefit him.
The Department opposes the continuance, noting the speculative nature of the
motion. Government counsel points out, and the experience of the Immigration Judge
confirms, that there is often some expectation of Immigration reform that does not
materialize, or, before the final passage of Immigration reform, one really does not know
what the form is going to take.
Government counsel asked the respondent to produce his passport for
inspection, counsel for the respondent stating that the respondent wishes post
completion voluntary departure. Respondent is in his lawer's ofice in Nashville,
Tennessee and the Court is in Memphis, Tennessee. However, several photocopies of
porions of respondent's passpor are found at Exhibit 3.
ANALYSIS
1. The motion to continue is denied.
It is well settled that an Immigration Judge may grant a continuance for good
cause shown. 8 C.F.R. Section 1003.29. This is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Factors to consider in determining whether an Immigration Judge has abused his
discretion is whether or not the motion was opposed by the OHS, whether or not there
has been time to gather the relevant evidence.
In the instant case, respondent has not submitted documents in support of his
application as required today. The Court thus deems all applications except for the
motion to continue to be abandoned. Matter of Interiano-Rosa, 25 l& N Dec. 264
A200-945-567 2 August 28, 2013
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
(BIA 2010), collecting cases stating the ability and authority of the Immigration Judge to
order documents filed and to deem them abandoned when they are not filed.
Respondent's request simply does not constitute good cause. Some porions of
the proposed legislation may avail him, but the key word here is proposed. At this point,
the Senate has passed an Immigration Reform Act and it is now before the House of
Representatives, and one really does not know what form this will take. This really is
nothing more than rank speculation and does not constitute good cause, and so the
Immigration Judge denies the continuance.
2. The request for voluntar departure is denied.
Under 8 C. F.R. Section 1240.26(c)(2), a respondent seeking post-completion
voluntary departure must provide upon request his passport or other travel document.
The Department "shall have full opportunity to inspect and photocopy the
documentation and to challenge its authenticity or sufficiency before voluntary deparure
is granted."
As a practical matter, this means that a respondent seeking voluntary departure
would come to the Court in Memphis with his passport, which he can then show to
Department counsel. In this instance, respondent chose to go to his lawer's ofce in
Nashville and did not even have a copy of the passport with him, saying it was at his
house. That means that nobody told him that he needed to be in Memphis with the
passpor for inspection, or at least to have it with him in Nashville.
On this record, the Immigration Judge cannot grant post-completion voluntary
deparure. The Immigration Judge gave respondent's counsel an opportunity to accept
pre-completion voluntary departure, which does not require a passport to be produced
for inspection. Counsel declined this opportunity.
A200-945-567 3 August 28,2013
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Thus, the Court concludes that respondent has not demonstrated good cause for
a continuance, and the Court also concludes that respondent has not demonstrated
eligibility for post-completion voluntary departure. In light of all the foregoing, the Court
enters this order:
ORDER
Respondent's request for a continuance is denied;
Respondent's request for voluntary departure is denied;
Respondent is ordered removed to Mexico.
Please see the next page for electronic
signature
A200-945-567
CHARLES E. PAZAR
Immigration Judge
4
August 28, 2013
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
11 sf I
I n gr at ion Judge aES E. P/
pazar c on Dcerer 4, 2013 at 11:08 PM G
A200-945-567 5 August 28,2013
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t