U.S.

Department of Justice
Executive Office for Immigration Review
Board of Immigration Appeals
Office of the Clerk
5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000
Fall. Church, Virginia 22041

Name: DclC l M-- DIIIIIIII

Date of this notice: 9/14/2015

Enclosed is a courtesy copy of the Board's decision in the above-referenced case.

Sincerely,

DOWtL

ca.AA)

Donna Carr
Chief Clerk
Enclosure
Panel Members:

Guendelsberger, John

Userteam:

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit

www.irac.net/unpublished/index/
Cite as: M-D-D-C-, AXXX XXX 677 (BIA Sept. 14, 2015)

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

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - LOS

606 S. Olive Street, 8th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90014

Talleda, Joaquin A., Esquire

Law Offices of Joaquin A. Talleda
1015 North Lake Avenue, Ste. 209
Pasadena, CA 91104-0000

---

us. Department of Justice

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

Date:

File: 677 - Los Angeles, CA

SEP 14 2015

a.k.a.

In re:

APPEAL
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Pro se 1
APPLICATION: Administrative closure
The respondent, a native and citizen of Nicaragua, appeals the May 7, 2013, decision by the
Immigration Judge denying her motion to suppress evidence and for termination of proceedings.
The record will be administratively closed.
On appeal, the respondent has requested that the Board hold her case in abeyance which we
will construe as a motion to administratively close proceedings to pursue T-nonimmigrant status.
In support of her motion she has filed evidence that she has filed an application for a T-visa and
may be eligible for T-nonimmigrant status. See 8 C.F.R. 214.ll(d)(S), Exh. 2 ID, (Form 1213). The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has not responded to the respondent's
appeal. See, e.g., Matter ofAvetisyan, 25 I&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2012).
In view of these circumstances, proceedings will be administratively closed in order to allow
the respondent the opportunity to pursue a T-nonimmigrant visa. Either party may move to
reinstate the appeal.
ORDER: The proceedings are administratively closed.
FURTHER ORDER: Either party may move to reinstate the appeal.

The respondent indicated in her brief on appeal that she is proceeding pro se. However, the
attorney of record did not withdraw and there is no indication that he was served with the
respondent's brief or otherwise informed of the respondent's decision regarding her
representation. Accordingly, we will send a courtesy copy of this decision to her former counsel.
Cite as: M-D-D-C-, AXXX XXX 677 (BIA Sept. 14, 2015)

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

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

October 23, 2013

File:--677
In the Matter of

M-D-cmllcmllllll

RESPONDENT

)
)
)
)

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

CHARGES:

Section 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, an

alien present in the United States without being admitted or
paroled.

APPLICATIONS:

None.

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: JOAQUIN TALLEDA

ON BEHALF OF DHS: ERICA ZIESCHANG

ORAL DECISION OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE

The respondent is a female native and citizen of Nicaragua who was
issued a Notice to Appear on August 4, 2008. See Exhibit 1. The respondent denied all
four factual allegations and the charge of removability. The respondent filed a motion to
suppress evidence and to terminate proceedings. The Court ruled on those motions
and issued a written decision on May 7. 2013 and handed that out to the parties in court
on May 7, 2013 and that decision is contained in the record of proceedings. The Court
hereby incorporates by reference that written decision that was issued on May 7, 2013

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

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION COURT
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

regarding the motion to suppress evidence and terminate proceedings.

In that decision, the Court found that the Government had established

prove that she is a United States citizen. She was unable to do so. Therefore, the
Court sustained all four allegations and the charge of removability on May 7, 2013. The
Court also designated Nicaragua as the country of removal.
The respondent stated at today's proceeding under oath that she does not
have any fear of return to Nicaragua. She also is not filing any applications for relief
from removal and instead wishes to receive the removal order and appeal the case to
the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Given the nature of the documents that the Government relied upon to
establish alienage, the Court reviewed the documents in the case to make sure that
there was no ineffective assistance of counsel. Specifically. at Exhibit 40, the Court
would note that the respondent's counsel set a letter to Officer Daniel Rocha of the
Department of Homeland Security in which the respondent and counsel had provided
biographical information to the Department of Homeland Security in order to have the
respondent released from custody. That information was thereafter used by the
Department of Homeland Security to establish alienage. The Court finds that this was
not ineffective assistance of counsel. The Court finds that this was a strategic decision
by the respondent and counsel to have the respondent released from custody.
Therefore, there was no ineffective assistance of counsel in this case.
Since the respondent is not filing any applications for relief from removal,
the Court must therefore issue the following orders.
ORDERS
The Court finds that the respondent is removable as charged in the Notice
677

October 23, 2013

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

alienage in the respondent's case and that the burden had shifted to the respondent to

to Appear.
IT IS ORDERED that the respondent be removed to Nicaragua as

If the respondent fails to appear pursuant to a final order of removal at the

time and place ordered by the Department of Homeland Security, other than because of
exceptional circumstances beyond her control, such as a serious illness to the
respondent or death of an immediate relative but nothing less serious, the respondent
will become ineligible for certain forms of relief for a period of 10 years from the date
that she was scheduled to appear for removal such as voluntary departure, cancellation
of removal, change or adjustment of status.

Please see the next page for electronic

signature

677

LORI R. BASS
Immigration Judge

October 23, 2013

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

charged in the Notice to Appear.

/Isl/
Immigration Judge LORI R. BASS

677

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

bassl on September 26, 2014 at 4:02 PM GMT

October 23, 2013