RELIEF - VOLUNTARY DEPARTURE - PRE-CONCLUSION REQUEST NOT ASSESSED UNDER THAT STANDARD UNLESS RESPONDENT WAIVES REMOVAL DEFENSES OR RELIEF
Hashish v. Gonzales, 442 F.3d 572 (7th Cir. Mar. 24, 2006) (timely request for pre-conclusion voluntary departure not alone sufficient to avoid stricter requirements of post-conclusion voluntary departure; other requirements of 8 U.S.C. 1240.26(b)(1)(i), including waiver of removal offenses or relief, must also be met).
RELIEF - VOLUNTARY DEPARTURE
Banda Oritz v. Gonzalez, __ F.3d __ (5th Cir. Mar. 28, 2006) (grant of a motion to reopen does not automatically stay a period of voluntary departure; noncitizen must additionally request stay or reinstatement of voluntary departure period), disagreeing with Azarte v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 1278 (9th Cir.2005); Kanivets v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 330 (3d Cir.2005); Sidikhouya v. Gonzales, 407 F.3d 950 (8th Cir.2005).
RELIEF - WAIVER - 212(C) WAIVER - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF
Lawrence v. Gonzales, 446 F.3d 221 (1st Cir. May 5, 2006) (where pre-IIRAIRA conviction was vacated on a basis of legal invalidity, but replaced with a new plea after IIRAIRA that also triggers removal, a waiver under INA 212(c) is unavailable where the new plea was not entered nunc pro tunc).
RELIEF - 212(C) RELIEF - JUDICIAL REVIEW
Avendano-Espejo v. Department of Homeland Sec., __ F.3d __ (2d Cir. May 11, 2006) (court lacks jurisdiction to review discretionary denial of INA 212(c) relief).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/0340921p.pdf
RELIEF - 212(C) RELIEF - NONCITIZEN ADMITTED AS LPR AFTER DISCLOSURE OF POSSESSION FOR SALE CONVICTION WAS NOT LAWFULLY ADMITTED AND THUS INELIGIBLE FOR 212(C) RELIEF
Savoury v. United States Atty Gen., __ F.3d __ (11th Cir. May 25, 2006) (noncitizen who was inadmissible at time of adjustment of status, but was allowed to adjust status by mistake, is not a noncitizen lawfully admitted to the United States for purposes of demonstrating eligibility for relief under former INA 212(c)).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/11th/0510966p.pdf
JUDICIAL REVIEW - BIA AUTHORITY TO ORDER REMOVAL
Solano-Chicas v. Gonzales, 440 F.3d 1050 (8th Cir. Mar. 17, 2006) (where BIA reverses an immigration judge's ruling granting cancellation of removal, the BIA has authority to order removal directly without remand to the IJ).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/043373p.pdf
JUDICIAL REVIEW - PETITION FOR REVIEW - COURT OF APPEALS HAS JURISDICTION TO CONSIDER CLAIMS OF ABUSE OF DISCRETION AND VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS IN DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF REMOVAL PROCEEDING
Khan v. Attorney General, 448 F.3d 226 (3d Cir. May 22, 2006) (court of appeals jurisdiction to consider arguments that BIA erred in affirming denial of request for continuance of removal hearing as abuse of discretion and as a violation of due process).
RELIEF - AMNESTY - SAW PROGRAM
Francis v. Gonzalez, 442 F.3d 131 (2d Cir. Mar. 27, 2006) (Special Agricultural Workers Program automatically adjusted applicants without regard to admissibility at the time of adjustment).
RELIEF - JUDICIAL REVIEW - LACHES DOCTRINE IS INAPPLICABLE AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT
Savoury v. U.S. Attorney General, 449 F.3d 1307 (11th Cir. May 25, 2006) (doctrine of laches is inapplicable against government who admitted respondent as LPR despite knowledge of a controlled substances conviction, and later sought to exclude him when he arrived from a trip abroad: "Neither this Court nor the Supreme Court has ever indicated that laches applies against the government.
JUDICIAL REVIEW - STANDARD OF REVIEW APPLIED BY BIA NOT SUBJECT TO CIRCUIT COURT REVIEW
Delgado-Reynua v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 596 (5th Cir. May 23, 2006) (noncitizens claim that BIA incorrectly applied de novo review in reversing IJs discretionary grant of relief under INA 212(c) was not a legal question subject to review; finding noncitizens claim was merely a disguised attempt to obtain circuit court review of discretionary issue).