RECENT SUCCESSES  

BOILA is very pleased to announce that Mr. N.M a native citizen of Cameroon, is being given another chance to obtain lawful status in the US.  After much negotiation done on his behalf by BOILA with DHS, DHS has compassionately consented to exercise prosecutorial discretion and file a joint motion to the BIA to remand his case and terminate his removal proceedings.  This was a rare and exceptional success, as Mr. N.M was ordered deported 14 years ago.  He will now be able to obtain his green card through an approved petition filed by his US citizen wife, with whom he has raised 3 US citizen children.   

Mr. TC a native of Cameroon, was granted asylum by the Arlington Asylum Office based on his membership in a particular social group, comprised of homosexuals.  Although Mr. TC had never suffered past persecution and had been living in the US for several years, BOILA successfully argued that the one-year filing deadline was inapplicable in his case and that irrefutable documentation on country conditions in his native country established that it is more likely than not he would face persecution on account of his sexual orientation in the event of his removal. 

Despite many difficult issues in her case, Ms. N. a native of Cameroon, was granted asylum by the Baltimore Immigration Court.  Through BOILA's assistance, Ms. N provided substantial evidence to establish that she was persecuted in her native country on account of her role as a journalist critical of the ruling party.  BOILA is very pleased that Ms. N, who was arrested on 4 separate occasions and brutally tortured, can now move on with her life.  

Ms. L. was granted asylum by the Arlington Immigration Court in early October 2011.  With BOILA's help, Ms. L filed credible evidence and testimony, establishing that she is a victim of past persecution in Cameroon on account of her political opinion, namely her active involvement with the Southern Cameroons National Council. 

Ms. N. was finally granted asylum by the Baltimore Immigration Court, nearly 7 years after coming to the United States.  Ms. N came to BOILA after her prior order of deportation to seek assistance on her appeal and BOILA successfully appealed the prior denial of asylum to the BIA,   Based on BOILA's arguments to the BIA, the BIA remanded her case back the Judge, holding that he could not base his decision on an unreliable forensics evaluation done by DHS.  Ms. N's many years of struggling to be recognized as a refugee are now over.   

Mr. H.T  a Francophone citizen of Cameroon, was granted asylum by the Arlington Asylum Office.  Mr. H.T. is a member of the UDC, an opposition political party in Cameroon, and as a result of his political activism, he suffered multiple instances of arrest and arbitrary detention in his native country.   

BOILA's application for a stay of deportation was granted by ICE in Cleveland, Ohio, allowing Ms. B to remain in the US with her US citizen husband and two US citizen children.  Ms. B had been ordered deported in 2002 and BOILA successfully convinced ICE to stay her deportation while USCIS adjudicated the I-130 petition filed on her behalf by her US citizen husband.

Mr. and Mrs. G.S native citizens of Columbia, were granted their green cards by the USCIS Baltimore District office through a petition filed on their behalf by their US citizen son. 

Mrs. S a native citizen of Russia, was granted her green card by the Washington District office  following an investigation by ICE based on the approval of a marriage-based petition, filed on her behalf by her US citizen husband. 

Mr. C.S. a native of Bolivia, is now the beneficiary of an approved I-130 petition, filed on his behalf by his US citizen daughter.

Ms. C. who BOILA assisted in filing for naturalization, is now a US citizen.

Mr. S. a citizen of Ghana, finally had his I-130 marriage-based petition approved by the Baltimore District office, roughly 6 years after the petition was initially filed.  The petition had previously been denied due to egregious errors on the part of his prior attorney.  Based on the approval of the petition, Mr. S's removal proceedings have been terminated, allowing him to pursue his green card application before USCIS.  

Ms. Ch. a citizen of Nigeria, was granted her green card based on an approved-family based petition. 

Mr. and Mrs. T had their I-130 application finally approved after a difficult interview in Baltimore and many delays caused by USCIS.  Based on the approval of the petition, Mrs. T was also granted her green card.   

After many years of struggling to resolve his immigration status, Mr. K was finally granted his green card by USCIS.  His removal proceedings were terminated by a joint motion of BOILA and DHS, allowing him obtain his green card before USCIS through the approved I-130 filed on his behalf by his US citizen wife. 

Ms. B a native of the Ivory Coast, was granted his naturalization and became a US citizen.  Ms. B and her family are old clients of BOILA, as BOILA assisted Ms. B's father in his efforts to secure asylum and permanent residency in the US many years ago.   

Mrs. F a native of Cameroon, was granted her naturalization and is now a US citizen.  She is a longtime client of BOILA, as BOILA assisted her in her efforts to secure asylum many years ago. 

Mr. I  a native of Nigeria was granted his green card and his I-130 petition was approved by the USCIS Washington District office. 

After BOILA successfully appealed Mr. M's case before the US Court of Appeals for the 4^th Circuit, Mr. M's removal proceedings were terminated by the Baltimore Immigration Court through the approval of his I-730 petition, derivative asylee petition, filed on his behalf by his wife. 

Mr. H  a native of Nigeria was granted his green card by the USCIS Washington District office. 

BOILA's appeal to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) was sustained and Ms. N is now a lawful permanent resident, after many years of struggling and fighting to achieve lawful status in the US.  Although USCIS had previously denied Ms. N's applications for her green card, in its appeal BOILA successfully established that Ms. N's prior acts did not constitute fraud or willful misrepresentations of a material fact. 

Be the first to correctly solve the crossword and you will win $150 towards your legal fees. 

Every year, on October 31^st, we celebrate Halloween - the day of the __(3)__. On this day, __(11)__ wait until it gets __(12)__ outside, put on their __(1)__ and paint their faces with __(17)__, and then set out to walk from house to house, __(6)__ on doors, and scream __(8)__ to get __(18)__.   People prepare for Halloween by putting up __(13)__   __(14)__ on and around their houses, such as spider __(15)__.   They carve __(5)__ into jack-o-lanterns and put them outside of their homes to ward off evil __(16)__. Many also go to get lost in corn __(10)__ , take __(7)__ of __(9)__ houses, and consume large quantities of the traditional candy __(2)__ and caramel __(4)__ to get into the Halloween spirit.

Word Bank:

With the beginning of the new Supreme Court term on October 3, the Supreme Court will be deciding critical issues on how important issues regarding the age of minors will be decided within the immigration context. On September 27, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in the case of Attorney General Holder v. Carlos Gutierrez. Although current immigration law allows an immigration judge (IJ) to issue an order cancelling removal if the immigrant has been "lawfully admitted for permanent residence for not less than five years," the ambiguity of this statute will be decided in the upcoming term of the Supreme Court.

Carlos Gutierrez attempted to smuggle aliens into the country in December of 2005. When looking at the time he spent in this country, the original IJ and the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals considered Gutierrez's years he spent with his family living in the United States before he was granted his own legal status. Gutierrez specifically relies on imputing his father's time in this country as part of Gutierrez's own time spent living in the United States as he originally entered the United States as a minor.

The Obama Administration believes that the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals was too liberal in its interpretation of the relevant statute. They argue that the statute's meaning must be considered on its face and that nowhere in the relevant INA provision is an imputation of a family member's time on the alien allowed. The ramifications for the 9^th Circuit are also wide. Currently, nearly half of all cancellation of removal cases occur in the 9^th Circuit. If the Supreme Court allows the imputation, it could have major ramifications for immigration attorneys, immigrants, and government bodies to try to determine if an individual is eligible for cancellation of removal.

Additionally, this also has implications for the Morton memo. The Morton memo specifically states that ICE officials will now exercise prosecutorial discretion in deciding which immigrants to bring in for removal proceedings. Given that Gutierrez was convicted for smuggling criminal aliens into the United States, if the Supreme Court allows Gutierrez to impute the time his father spent in this country as an LPR on his own time as an LPR, it could directly limit the government's deportation effort to focus its efforts on high priority immigrants.

Gutierrez is not the only case that directly looks at the issue of the age of the children of illegal aliens. In 2005, an Immigration Judge determined that Joel Judalang was removable. Although Judalang's parents were able to receive US Citizenship after arriving to the United States, they failed to file the necessary paperwork for their then 8 year old son. Judalang was convicted for manslaughter nearly two decades later and an Immigration Judge found him removable. Currently, the Supreme Court is trying to determine whether Judalang received derivative citizenship through his parents when he was 8 years old.

Currently, 1 million illegal immigrants are under the age of 18 and their status remains in limbo. Several states are now supporting a measure that will attempt to deny the children of illegal immigrants that were born in the United States from being issued birth certificates. The status of the DREAM Act remains uncertain. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will offer greater clarity as to how children are to be treated in the INA and lawmakers will take notice and realize that by continuing to ostracize the children of illegal immigrants, attempts at having them become productive US citizens will fail.

New Board of Immigration Appeals Decision Case on Aggravated Felony Bars Cancellation of Removal to Lawful Permanent Residents 

Mr. Robert Bautista, a native of Dominican Republic and a lawful permanent resident since August 1984 was convicted in New York in 2003 of an attempted arson in the 3rd degree and was given 5 years of probation.  Despite being  a permanent resident and legal for the past 27 years, the BIA determined that he was an aggravated felon and thus not eligible for relief under section 101(a)(43)(E) which requires 5 years as a lawful permanent resident and 7 years residency.

According to the BIA attempted arson in the third degree in violation of sections 110 and150.10 of the New York Penal Law is an aggravated felony under  section 101 (a)(43)(E)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8U.S.C. �1101(a)(43)(E)(i) (2006), even though the State crime lacks the jurisdictional element in the applicable Federal arson offense. Matter of Vasquez-Muniz, 23I&N Dec. 207 (BIA 2002), followed." Matter of BAUTISTA, ID 3730, 25 I&N Dec. 616 (BIA 2011), Oct. 13, 2011