Scribd
Upload
552 views

Board of Immigration Appeals Motion To Reopen

Manchanda Law Office PLLC headed by Attorney Rahul Manchanda for Respondent

Uploaded by

DARK_KNIGHT_10005
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
552 views

Board of Immigration Appeals Motion To Reopen

Manchanda Law Office PLLC headed by Attorney Rahul Manchanda for Respondent

Uploaded by

DARK_KNIGHT_10005
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 18
Rahul Manchanda, Esq. Manchanda Law Office PLLC 17 State Street Suite 4000 NON-DETAINED New York, New York 10004 Tel: (212) 968-8600 Haz: (212) 968-8601 UNITED STATES DEPARINENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA In the Matter of IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS a we Filet: A 2, Respondent. RESPONDENTS’ MOTION 10 REOPEN UNDER MATTER OF TOZADA, REQUEST FOR AN EMERGENCY STAY OF REMOVAL, POLITICAL ASYLUM/UNCAT/WITHHOLDING OF REMOVAL FOR CHANGED COUNTRY CONDITIONS, I-60] HARDSHIP WAIVER, 1-130 ALIEN RELATIVE PETITION BASED ON MARRIAGE TO A US CITIZEN, AND U VISA PETITION INTERIM RELIEF FROM DEPORTATION AS VICTIM OF CRIME UNITED STATZS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION REVIEW BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA IN THE MATTER OF IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS a ws, File#: 3 —_—_ii NON-DETAINED Respondent. ARESPYONDENTS*“MOTION TO REOPEN AND REQUEST SOrEMERGSNCY STAY Respoidert, Si QM, by and Liracgh his a MANCHAMUR “AW GFFICD PLLC, hereby moves this Honorable © Lo reopen kis rene taat Respondert had i. at bis prev'e immigration proc dve process rights. Ir the alternative, the lonorable Cour. exercise its sua sperte author! =v viclatiors. peti che case based on tnese sane due proce: Tn addicion, Re! dent hereby maves iis court to geaul an Emergency ey of Removal, set Reowea Ais Reams Proveadings te a spondent Lo agyiy for an Ame‘ a fer an 1-13¢ Blier Bi sd On Merrisge to 4 Application fer Tulerim Relief from Deporsation «x Victim of Crime, Asylum, Withholdiry ot Removal, Relief under the United Convention Ageinst Dorsare (“UNCAT’) for ¢ aged sounzry cond 1 support ct Lhis Motion, Respondenz s5reag ote oo LeTlawing: pen sth states’ t I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY * aad citizen ef ory. ke is alse nappily married Upon inZorratior. and oclict, on er abouz September 7, 2005 Respondent e:lezed Tees in ed States withoun irspectica. Or or apour October 2096 tke responder ad in zenoy preceeding carauga Lhe isscance of Kotice ts Appear ("NTA") in Sew Tork City chacgiag Respondent as renoveadle ary Responsent appeased with his co cr ca’ ender Hearir im New York os July 21, 20°5 alter case trans! jont's Applicerion for Asylum, g of Removal, and UNCET even thoagk Lhe BLA determined that Respondent wae trealed anfairly by Immigration dadge Pauch ia deternining ondert's credibi7icy (Respondent filed 2 Cadicial Complaint n POTR OT ie of Frofessiona? Resporsibil iLyt, sad the lJ ordered Respordent removed to K SOve. retained e legal services ie asylum ard adjustment of status for relief. However, Respondent's ci sel was a0 epared, and did not prepare a groper asylum and Respondent was lerced the £ Compleirt ageinst this lawye:. Roreover, Respondent's second atzerrey, one Loe Ma gan, wes cduelly incongetert ard unoresarcd as na Cailee .¢ progerly diagnose that Respo eligible Lor Waiver unde= Tnlesin § vaich ioveectigating, mereied La a US Citizen, as well as changed country couditi sin the 2S Ww st year. requess this Honcrable Coart grant Respondent's Necion ce Reope: because Vis previous attusneys provided stance cf counes. in orde- | Respercent to anply far counsel and the telling sont @ respondent efin‘cively learns of coursel’s compet al ex fzaud." Albille-De Leor . Gonzalez, 129 0 (Sth cir. 2095). case Respondent aired “+ ard then : Esq. of New York snd Mic! be asylat arc e failec ve submil as ors for relief, and properly diagause Resp nt 's coaer available celiel. Claims toe iceffeclive assial 62 counsel must course] would e.2d 108, 122 f2d qoth Gir. ars eal] was prejudiced by his Nolisseni Sehbahant TaN Des. at aca. 2 78 miscerduc demons faced 2 tsuly shock: regard for their elierh and coneviluled a Gaager te any client wae might recain them. See ¥i Leng Yang, ATR V.3d at 142. Ths ineffectiveness of aeeperdent!s former lawyers is aviden: en the face of this votton and Respondent has substantially comp ted with Lozada. Slip Copy, 2097 Wo 21gBl1lb *2 (2d Cir, Aug, Ine failures of Respondent's azcerneys Lo properly and ere in line with Lozada simely fale applicaciens for relief d respordart!s case. Tn adéinion, ess aeceuse Li our. never discussed =1e avguments of ais different avat’ao’e bat Aitherts undiagnosed claims for relief; it was simply dismisses dae to a failure cf bis ys to either properly ox 134 26 491, 499-500 {Sta Cie. cance of counsel ‘¢ 2 denial of due procese if “the preceeding was so fencame ally unfair that the alien wes prevented from reasorabl 3. Ze 1014, 1017 |G Cir. 1985); See slso 879, 8 z Cir. 1394). cn the eresent « se, Respondent has sufficiently nex nis ol © 2 case la the regair sada and subseque: Respondent's complaint statements c. azy aad somprehe: state on their ce bow his previous athorreys conduc: rose of fairness where a iparcy] kas me extraordinary way from cxercising cin. i2q Cir IIT. CONCLUSION WHEREFORE, Resporcenz, reepect Cally . The Respondent roqussis his aetion ie zeogen be qranz further requeses any ocher relief Lhat xt acens z and proger. 2015 Dated: August Se Manckanda Lew Office PLLC 2? Slate - Suite 4006 otk, Yew Yors 10064 (212) 468-2699 i21z} seu-Beal UNTTRR STATES DR2ARTMEK? 0: JUSTICE CUTIVE OFFICE [OR LMMIGRATTON RRVIEW BOARD CF “METERATICN A22ZALS CHURCH, ¥_EGTNTA the aatter 5 ORDER OF THE BIA Consideration of the Responcsnz TON EERE3Y ORDEREC hat the motion de 1 GRAI because: 0D 2HS de D the reapondeat doss act appose the motion Ma “espor: Uke notion has ast been ed with the sent. CD Good cause hes been esLlabl. M the court agrees wita ¢ opposision te the motion Othe metion is untimely pez Fi Cther: ned fo2 Lhe se.iea. ree. ens elated ia Las wast be filed by the DIS bicmetrii Cecvilivate cf de, “his docurert was eezved by: | | Mail | Jpersonal Sezvice [1 Alien [ 1 Atten eJo Custedial | | Alients DES By: Court slali CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE that 6 tone cozzect copy of t Respordent's Motion wen wes placed into 7.3. Beil oa Angus tor 17, 2015 address: EXECUTIVE OTPLCH FOR TMMIGRATION REV= kw BOARD OF TMIGRADION APPRATS OPPICE Ck THE CHIEF CLERK S107 LEESBIRG PIKK, SUTTR 2000 FALLS CECRCA, VIECINIA 2294] EPARTMENT OF HONKAND Attorney Init Ellior, Second Floor reit, Michigan 48207 SURTTY State ScreeL — Suite 1090 New York, New York 10664 lel: (212) 968-9806 xt (212) 968-8601

You might also like