(C)  Court Order That Has Been Vacated.  Just as a criminal conviction that has been vacated on a ground of legal invalidity can no longer support a deportation order,  a court order finding a noncitizen violated a protective order may be attacked by showing the protective order was not lawfully issued, framed, or properly served on the respondent prior to the alleged violation or the hearing concerning the violation, or on any other legal ground.[1214]

[1214] Matter of Pickering, 23 I. & N. Dec. 621 (BIA 2003).

SAFE HAVENS " DOMESTIC VIOLENCE " VIOLATION OF PROTECTION ORDER
Matter of Strydom, 25 I. & N. Dec. 507 (BIA May 24, 2011) (We recognize that not all aspects of a protection order will trigger section 237(a)(2)(E)(ii). The Ninth Circuit noted that provisions requiring attendance at and payment for a counseling program or requiring the payment of costs for supervision during parenting time will not be covered by section 237(a)(2)(E)(ii).); quoting Szalai v. Holder, 572 F.3d 975, 980 (9th Cir. 2009).

BIA

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE " VIOLATION OF PROTECTION ORDER
Matter of Strydom, 25 I. & N. Dec. 507 (BIA May 24, 2011) (Kansas conviction for violation of a temporary protection order issued pursuant to Kansas Protection from Abuse Act 60-3106, in violation of Kan. Stats. 21-3843(a)(1), does not categorically constitute a deportable offense under section INA 237(a)(2)(E)(ii), because the statute of conviction includes violations of non-DV restraining orders such as Kan. Stat. 60-1607 which pertains to orders involving the disposition of property pending final judgment on a petition for divorce).

SAFE HAVENS " DOMESTIC VIOLENCE " VIOLATION OF PROTECTION ORDER
Matter of Strydom, 25 I. & N. Dec. 507 (BIA May 24, 2011) (We recognize that not all aspects of a protection order will trigger section 237(a)(2)(E)(ii). The Ninth Circuit noted that provisions requiring attendance at and payment for a counseling program or requiring the payment of costs for supervision during parenting time will not be covered by section 237(a)(2)(E)(ii).); quoting Szalai v. Holder, 572 F.3d 975, 980 (9th Cir. 2009).