Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Department of Justice
Executive Office for Immigration Review
Board of Immigration Appeals
Office of the Clerk
5/07 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000
Falls Church, Virginia 2204/
Name:R_E_
Date of this notice: 12/21/2016
Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case.
Sincerely,
DorvtL Ct:uVu
Donna Carr
Chief Clerk
Enclosure
Panel Members:
Kendall-Clark, Molly
Userteam: Docket
GONZALEZ-RUCCI, ROSAURA
ROSAURA GONZALEZ-RUCCI
P. 0. BOX 6363
LOIZA STREET STATION
SAN JUAN, PR 00914
Date:
DEC 2 1 2016
In re:E-
MOTION
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT:
The respondent, who was a rider in her father's proceedings, was 9 years old when we
reinstated a 60 days voluntary departure in August 2012. We find that the bar in section
240B(d)(l)(B) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1229c(d)(l)(B), does not apply to the respondent. Her
failure to depart the United States during the voluntary departure period was not "voluntary" as,
due to her young age, she did not understand the consequences of not leaving under the
voluntary departure order, and was likely unable to depart on her own. See generally Matter of
Zmijewska, 24 l&N Dec. 87 (BIA 2007) (finding that an alien has not voluntarily failed to depart
the United States under section 240B(d)(l) of the Act when the alien, through no fault of his or
her own, was unaware of the voluntary departure order or was physically unable to depart within
the time granted).
Cite as: E-R-, AXXX XXX 571 (BIA Dec. 21, 2016)
IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
571
ORDER: The respondent's motion to reopen is granted and the record is remanded to the
Immigration Court for further proceedings consistent with this decision.
FURTHER ORDER: The respondent's motion for a stay of removal is denied as moot.
2
Cite as: E-R-, AXXX XXX 571 (BIA Dec. 21, 2016)