U.S.

Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board ofImmigration Appeals
Office of the Clerk
5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000
Falls Church, Virginia 22041

DHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - MEM

80 Monroe Ave., Ste 502
Memphis, TN 38102

Name: BERNABE-CHINCHABEL, JOEL

A 205-152-029
Date of this notice: 11/30/2015

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case.
Sincerely,

Don,u._ C

aftA)

Donna Carr
Chief Clerk
Enclosure
Panel Members:
Grant, Edward R.
Adkins-Blanch, Charles K.
Guendelsberger, John

'

':,... '

Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit

www.irac.net/unpublished/index/
Cite as: Joel Bernabe-Chinchabel, A205 152 029 (BIA Nov. 30, 2015)

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

Dendy, Aaron
Community Law Group, PLLC.
2604 Nolensville Pike, Suite C
Nashville, TN 37211

U.S. Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Decision ofthe Board oflmmigration Appeals

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

File:

A205 152 029 - Memphis, TN

Date:

NOV 3 0 2015

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
APPEAL
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Aaron Dendy, Esquire
APPLICATION: Continuance
The respondent, a native and citizen of Mexico, has appealed from the Immigration Judge's
decision dated March 5, 2014. The record will be remanded to the Immigration Judge.
The Board reviews an Immigration Judge's findings of fact, including findings as to the
credibility of testimony, under the "clearly erroneous" standard. 8 C.F.R. 1003.l(d)(3)(i);
Matter of S-H-, 23 I&N Dec. 462, 464-65 (BIA 2002). The Board reviews questions of law,
discretion, and judgment and all other issues in appeals from decisions of Immigration Judges de
novo. 8 C.F.R. 1003.l(d)(3)(ii).
The Immigration Judge denied the respondent's request for additional time to seek an
attorney. We acknowledge the Immigration Judge's reasoning but find it appropriate to remand
the record for the Immigration Judge to give the respondent one more opportunity to seek an
attorney and to determine if the respondent has any relief available at present.
Accordingly, the following order will be ntered.
ORDER: The record is remanded to ili Immigration Judge for further proceedings
consistent with the foregoing opinion and for the try of a new decision.

Cite as: Joel Bernabe-Chinchabel, A205 152 029 (BIA Nov. 30, 2015)

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

In re: JOEL BERNABE-CHINCHABEL

March 5, 2014

File: A205-152-029
In the Matter of

JOEL BERNABE-CHINCHABEL
RESPONDENT

)
)
)
)

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

CHARGES:

Section 212(a)(6)(A)(i), alien present without being admitted or

paroled.

APPLICATIONS:

A continuance.

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: PRO SE

ON BEHALF OF OHS: JONATHAN LARCOMB

ORAL DECISION AND O RDER

Respondent is a native and citizen of Mexico. He appeared before the
Immigration Court initially on January 16, 2013, today being March 5, 2014.
On January 16, 2013 the Immigration Judge gave the respondent an
opportunity to look for an attorney, and he came back today without an attorney.
Respondent requested another continuance to find an attorney, citing his inability to
support his family.
The Immigration Judge asked respondent questions concerning his

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION COURT
MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE

background and whether there is any form of relief available for him. Respondent

March of 2007 through Arizona. He apparently has a son who is a United States
citizen.
The Immigration Judge explained to the respondent several times the
difference between voluntary departure pre-completion and voluntary departure post
completion and gave the respondent the option to either take 120 days voluntary
departure or to appeal his decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals through 60
days post-completion voluntary departure. The respondent repeatedly interrupted the
Immigration Judge as if the Immigration Judge had not explained anything to him.
Government counsel asked the respondent whether he had a passport
and respondent said he left the passport at home. Accordingly, the Immigration Judge
concludes under regulations promulgated at 8 C.F. R. 1240.26, that the respondent is
ineligible for post-completion voluntary departure because he could not produce a
passport which the Department attorney could review.
Respondent kept asking the Court for more time to find an attorney. An
Immigration Judge may grant a continuance for good cause shown. 8 C.F.R. 1003.29.
The denial of such a motion is reviewed for abuse of discretion. See generally cases
collected at Kwak v. Holder, 607 F.3d 1140 (6th Cir. 2010).
In this case, the Immigration Judge has given respondent 14 months to
find a lawyer and he does not have a lawyer. Immigration Judge has done his level
best to explain to this respondent what forms of relief he has available to him and the
respondent continues to obfuscate and will not answer questions straight. Nonetheless,
the Immigration Judge gave respondent three opportunities to accept pre-completion
voluntary departure of 120 days which in the Immigration Judge's estimation would be

A205-152-029

March 5, 2014

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

testified that he is a native and citizen of Mexico who came to the United States in

to the best interest of this respondent who has no form of relief available for him in the
United States.

Immigration Appeals and that is his right. This respondent does not have a passport.
The only order that can be appealed at this time is an order of removal, and accordingly
the Court enters an order of removal ordering the respondent removed to Mexico.
ORDER
The charges are hereby sustained, the Immigration Judge finding that
respondent is an alien present without being admitted or paroled;
Respondent is hereby ordered removed to Mexico.

Please see the next page for electronic

signature

A205-152-029

CHARLES E. PAZAR
Immigration Judge

March 5, 2014

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

Respondent, however, wishes to appeal this decision to the Board of

/Isl/
Immigration Judge CHARLES E. PAZAR

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

pazarc on September 3, 2014 at 5:10 PM GMT

A205-152-029

March 5 1 2014

'Jff.....?'i?.v