CITIZENSHIP - DERIVATIVE CITIZENSHIP
Matter of Guzman-Gomez, 24 I. & N. Dec. 824 (BIA May 8, 2009) (the terms "child" and "parent" defined at 8 U.S.C. 1101(c), do not encompass stepchildren and stepparents; a person born outside the United States cannot derive United States citizenship under 8 U.S.C. 1431(a), by virtue of his or her relationship to a nonadoptive stepparent).
REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS - ADMISSIONS BY COUNSEL
Matter of Velasquez, 19 I. & N. Dec. 377 (BIA 1986) (absent egregious circumstances, a distinct and formal admission made by an attorney acting in his professional capacity binds the respondent as a judicial admission; the admission is binding on the respondent and may be relied upon as evidence of deportability).
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
Perez-Alvarez v. INS, 857 F.2d 23, 24 (1st Cir.1988) ("As a general rule, in considering claims of persecution I think it highly advisable to avoid assumptions regarding the way other societies operate. Time and again this Board has considered appeals in which assumptions of this nature have been proven to be totally wrong...."); Cordero-Trejo v. INS , 40 F.3d 482 (1st Cir. 1994).
BIBLIO - CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
Walter Kalin,Troubled Communication: Cross-Cultural Misunderstandings in the Asylum Hearings, 20 Intl. Mig. Rev. 230 (1986).
Susan Bryant, The Five Habits: Building Cross-Cultural Competence In Lawyers 8 Clinical L. Rev. 33 (2001)
Richard W. Brislin & Eugene S. Kim, Cultural Diversity In People's Understanding And Uses Of Time, 52 Applied Psychol.: An Int'l Rev. 363, 374 (2003).
Jean R. Sternlight, Good Lawyers Should Be Good Psychologists: Insights For Interviewing And Counseling Clients, 23 Ohio St. J. On Disp. Resol. 437 (2008)
JUDICIAL REVIEW - STATUTORY INTERPRETATION -- CHEVRON DEFERENCE - LACK OF AMBIGUITY PREVENTS NEED TO REACH SECOND STEP OF CHEVRON ANALYSIS
Taing v. Napolitano, 567 F.3d 19 (1st Cir. May 20, 2009) (since the statute is unambiguous, the court need not reach the second step of the Chevron analysis).
JUDICIAL REVIEW - STATUTORY INTERPRETATION -- CHEVRON DEFERENCE - LACK OF AMBIGUITY PREVENTS NEED TO REACH SECOND STEP OF CHEVRON ANALYSIS
Taing v. Napolitano, 567 F.3d 19 (1st Cir. May 20, 2009) (since the statute is unambiguous, the court need not reach the second step of the Chevron analysis).
IMMIGRATION OFFENSES
United States v. Tureseo, 566 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. May 14, 2009) (court erred in failing to instruct jury that aggravated identity theft conviction required proof that defendant knew the identification belonged to another, real, person), following Flores-Figueroa v. United States, __U.S. __, 129 S.Ct. 1886 (2009).
IMMIGRATION STATUS - LAWFUL PERMANENT RESIDENT - RESCISSION
Sharkey v. Quarantillo, 541 F.3d 75 (2d Cir. 2008) (USCIS must follow rescission procedure before cancelling an I-551 stamp in a passport, claiming it had been issued in error, because the stamp created a "rebuttable presumption of LPR status"). I-551 cards constitute evidence of LPR status, and counsel can argue it is improper for USCIS to take them back. See 8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(17).
IMMIGRATION OFFENSES - AGGRAVATED IDENTITY THEFT - ELEMENTS
United States v. Tureseo, 566 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. May 14, 2009) (conviction for identity theft, under 18 U.S.C. 1028A, requires proof that the defendant knew that the means of identity he used falsely to claim United States citizenship belonged to another person, i.e., an actual person), following Flores-Figueroa v. United States, 129 S.Ct. 1886 (May 4, 2009).
RELIEF - NON-LPR CANCELLATION OF REMOVAL
Mendez v. Holder, 566 F.3d 316 (2d Cir. May 8, 2009) (BIA made legal error by overlooking and mischaracterizing medical facts relevant to determination of exceptional and extremely unusual hardship standard for non-LPR cancellation of removal)
