U.S.

Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board of Immigration Appeals
Office of the Clerk
5107 Leesburg Pike, Suile 2000
Falls Church, Virginia 2204 I

Name: Pc- MIIIIIIEDate of this notice: 9/2/2015

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case.
Sincerely,

DGnltL

aAA)

Donna Carr
Chief Clerk
Enclosure
Panel Members:
Grant, Edward R.
Guendelsberger, John
Holiona, Hope Malia

Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit

www.irac.net/unpublished/index/
Cite as: M-E-P-C-, AXXX XXX 389 (BIA Sept. 2, 2015)

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

DHS/ICE - Office of Chief Counsel - OKT

4400 SW 44th Street, Suite A
Oklahoma City, OK 73119-2800

Langer, Steven Franklin

Langer Law, PLC
600 N Walker Ave
Ste 220
Oklahoma City, OK 73102

U.S. Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

Date:

SEP - 2 2015

In re: NtmlllllE-
IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
APPEAL
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Steven F. Langer, Esquire
An appeal from the Immigration Judge's decision in this case is currently pending before the
Board of Immigration Appeals ("Board"). We find that administrative closure of these
proceedings is appropriate, pending the adjudication by the Department of Homeland Security of
a prima facie approvable Special Immigrant Juvenile petition (Form 1-360) on behalf of the
respondent.
If either party to this case wishes to reinstate the removal proceedings, a written request to
reinstate the proceedings may be made to the Board. The Board will take no further action in the
case unless a request is received from one of the parties. The request must be submitted directly
to the Clerk's Office, without fee, but with certification of service on the opposing party.
Accordingly, the following order will be entered.
ORDER: The proceedings before. the Board of Immigration Appeals in this case are
administratively closed.

Cite as: M-E-P-C-, AXXX XXX 389 (BIA Sept. 2, 2015)

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

File: 389 - Tulsa, OK

April 28, 2015

File:389
In the Matter of
)
)
)
)

M_E_P__C_
DETAINED ALIEN

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

CHARGES:

Section 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (Act),

as amended, in that you are an alien present in the United States
without being admitted or paroled, or who arrived in the United
States at any time or place other than designated by the Attorney
General.

APPLICATIONS:

Request for a continuance.

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: STEVEN S. LANGER, Esquire

600 North Walker Avenue, Suite 220
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102
ON BEHALF OF DHS: BRANDON URO, Esquire
Assistant Chief Counsel
Dallas, Texas

ORAL DECISION AND ORDER OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE

The respondent is a native and citizen of Guatemala. He arrived in the
United States at or near Rio Grande City, Texas on or about January 12, 2015. At that
time he was not admitted or paroled after inspection by an Immigration officer.

w:W._

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

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION COURT
DALLAS, TEXAS

Consequently, the Department of Homeland Security (hereinafter the Government)

charged the respondent with removal pursuant Section 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the

United States without being admitted or paroled, or who arrived in the United States at
any time or place other than is designated by the Attorney General. See Exhibit 1.
On April 14, 2015, the respondent acknowledged receipt of the Notice to
Appear and it was placed in the record as Exhibit 1. The respondent requested his
case be continued to allow him to seek counsel. The matter was continued up to today,
April 28, 2015 at 9:30.
At today's hearing on April 28, 2015, the respondent through counsel
admitted to the factual allegations contained in the Notice to Appear and conceded to
the charge of removal. Therefore, removal was established. The respondent declined
to designate a country in the event it became necessary. Pursuant to the regulations
the Court designated Guatemala.
The respondent's counsel indicated the respondent is not seeking any
relief before the Court other than a request for a continuance. In requesting for a
continuance, the respondent is not seeking relief before the Court. He is seeking to
have adjudicated a declaration or a petition to a State Court declaring him a juvenile so
that he can file a juvenile visa.
The Immigration and Nationality Act does not contain specific statute
authority for the adjudication of motions to continue in removal proceedings. Rather,
Immigration Judges have broad discretion, authority over motions to continue as stated
in 8 C.F.R. Section 1003.29. The Immigration Judge may grant a motion for a
continuance for good cause shown. See also 8 C.F.R. Section 1240.6, providing that
the Immigration Judge may grant a reasonable adjournment either at his or her own

389

.Jh.

... .$

April 28, 2015

..!!M:;;;-,:H

.v.W..... .i:r:xi.'UJ.;:;;n
:

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

Immigration and Nationality Act (Act) as amended, in that he is an alien present in the

,I

instance or for good cause shown upon application by the respondent or the
Government.

seeking relief before the Court. The respondent is seeking relief before the Department
of Homeland Security in the form of a special juvenile Immigrant visa if the respondent
is declared awarded to the Court and that petition is approved. This is not relief before
the Court. Even though the Court will order the respondent removed from the United
States, he can still apply for a petition before a State Court to be declared a juvenile and
apply with the U.S. Immigration Service to have a special juvenile visa either
adjudicated, approved, or denied. The Court finds that after reviewing all the facts in
this case a continuance is not warranted because respondent has failed to establish
good cause because he is not seeking any relief before this Court. Accordingly, the
following orders will enter.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the respondent's request for a continuance be
denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the respondent be removed and
deported from the United States to Guatemala based on the charge contained in the
Notice to Appear.
Dated this 28th day of 2015.

DEITRICH H. SIMS
Immigration Judge
Dallas, Texas

389

'

. iilLL.&G3

April 28, 2015

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

Here the Court finds there is no good cause and the respondent is not

'
'

"

'

CERTIFICATE PAGE

in the matter of:

389

DALLAS, TEXAS
was held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of
the Executive Office for Immigration Review.

CAROL M. WILLIAMS (Transcriber)

DEPOSITION SERVICES, tnc.-2
JUNE 4, 2015
(Completion Date)

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

I hereby certify that the attached proceeding before JUDGE DEITRICH H. SIMS,