Matter of Gamero

Board of Immigration AppealsJan 13, 2010
25 I&N Dec. 164 (B.I.A. 2010)

Cases citing this document

How cited

  • Trejo v. Garland

    This is precisely how the BIA describes the eligibility-for-cancellation-of-removal hardship inquiry. See,…

  • Ramirez-Garay v. Holder

    The rule exists to avoid penalizing immigrants for violating conditions that they find Herculean or for…

7 Citing cases

Summaries written by judges

Summaries

  • concluding that remand is "the appropriate remedy when the mandatory advisals have not been provided"

    Summary of this case from Solis-Flores v. Garland

  • describing the hardship determination as the "application of the pertinent legal standards" to factual findings

    Summary of this case from Galvan v. Garland

File A098 330 107.Los Angeles, California

Decided January 13, 2010.

(1) Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1240.26(c)(3) (2010), an Immigration Judge who grants an alien voluntary departure must advise the alien that proof of posting of a bond with the Department of Homeland Security must be submitted to the Board of Immigration Appeals within 30 days of filing an appeal and that the Board will not reinstate a period of voluntary departure in its final order unless the alien has timely submitted sufficient proof that the required bond has been posted.

(2) Where the Immigration Judge did not provide all the advisals that are required upon granting voluntary departure and the respondent failed to submit timely proof to the Board that a voluntary departure bond had been posted, the record was remanded for the Immigration Judge to grant a new period of voluntary departure and to provide the required advisals.

FOR RESPONDENT: Carlos A. Cruz, Esquire, Alhambra, California

BEFORE: Board Panel: ADKINS-BLANCH, WENDTLAND, and GUENDELSBERGER, Board Members.