Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 438 views

    Juan Carlos Rivas-Ayala, A208 890 222 (BIA Oct. 11, 2017)

    Uploaded by

    Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC
    In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) declined to consider an interlocutory DHS appeal challenging a decision granting a pro se respondent’s request for a second continuance. The decision was issued by Member Molly Kendall Clark.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Juan Carlos Rivas-Ayala, A208 890 222 (BIA Oct. 11, 2017)

    Uploaded by

    Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC
    438 views2 pages
    In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) declined to consider an interlocutory DHS appeal challenging a decision granting a pro se respondent’s request for a second continuance. The decision was issued by Member Molly Kendall Clark.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) declined to consider an interlocutory DHS appeal challenging a decision granting a pro se respondent’s request for a second continuance. The decision was issued by Member Molly Kendall Clark.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    438 views2 pages

    Juan Carlos Rivas-Ayala, A208 890 222 (BIA Oct. 11, 2017)

    Uploaded by

    Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC
    In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) declined to consider an interlocutory DHS appeal challenging a decision granting a pro se respondent’s request for a second continuance. The decision was issued by Member Molly Kendall Clark.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    U.S.

    Department of Justice
    - .

    Executive Office for Immigration Review

    Board ofImmigration Appeals


    Office ofthe Clerk

    5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000


    Falls Church, Virginia 22041

    Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net


    OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - BAL
    31 Hopkins Plaza, Room 1600
    Baltimore, MD 21201

    Name: RIVAS-AYALA, JUAN CARLOS A 208-890-222


    Riders:208-890-223

    Date of this notice: 10/11/2017

    Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision in the above-referenced case. If the attached
    decision orders that you be removed from the United States or affirms an Immigration Judge's
    decision ordering that you be removed, any petition for review of the attached decision must
    be filed with and received by the appropriate court of appeals within 30 days of the date of
    this decision.

    Sincerely,

    Donna Carr
    Chief Clerk

    Enclosure

    Panel Members:
    Kendall Clark, Molly

    Userteam: Docket

    For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit


    www.irac.net/unpublished/index

    Cite as: Juan Carlos Rivas-Ayala, A208 890 222 (BIA Oct. 11, 2017)
    ...
    '

    ./ U.S. Department of Justice Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals


    Executive Office for Immigration Review

    Falls Church, Virginia 22041

    Files: A208 890 222 - Baltimore, MD Date:


    A208 890 223 OCT 11 2017
    In re: Juan Carlos RIVAS-AYALA

    Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net


    Josue Neftali RIVAS-MERCADO

    IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

    INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL

    ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS: Pro se

    The Department of Homeland Security (OHS) has filed an interlocutory appeal from the
    Immigration Judge's May 23, 2017, decision to grant a second continuance in this case. To avoid
    piecemeal review of the multiple queries that may arise during the course of removal proceedings,
    ordinarily the Board does not entertain interlocutory appeals. See Matter ofM-D-, 24 I&N Dec.
    138, 139 (BIA 2007), and cases cited therein. We have on occasion accepted interlocutory appeals
    to address significant jurisdictional questions about the administration of the immigration laws, or
    to correct recurring problems in the handling of cases by Immigration Judges. See, e.g., Matter of
    Guevara, 20 I&N Dec. 238 (BIA 1990, 1991); Matter ofDobere, 20 I&N Dec. 188 (BIA 1990).
    The issue of whether the Immigration Judge properly granted the respondents' request for a
    continuance does not present a significant jurisdictional question about the administration of the
    immigration laws, nor does it involve a recurring problem in Immigration Judges' handling of
    cases. Thus, the question raised in this interlocutory appeal does not fall within the limited ambit
    of cases where we deem it appropriate to exercise our jurisdiction. Accordingly, the following
    order will be entered.

    ORDER: The record shall be returned to the Immigration Court with no further action.

    Cite as: Juan Carlos Rivas-Ayala, A208 890 222 (BIA Oct. 11, 2017)

    You might also like