U.S.

Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board of Immigration Appeals

Office of the Clerk

5/07 Leesburg Pike, Suile 2000

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

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

Tousley, Thomas Harry DHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - WAS
Law Office of Thomas H. Tousley 1901 S. Bell Street, Suite 900
600 Cameron Street Arlington, VA 22202
Alexandria, VA 22314

Name: LAMIN,ALHAJI SHOKU OSMAN A 079-236-239

Date of this notice: 7/18/2017

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

Sincerely,

,J

Cynthia L. Crosby
Deputy Chief Clerk

Enclosure

Panel Members:
Kendall Clark, Molly

Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit

www.irac.net/unpublished/index/

Cite as: Alhaji Shoku Lamin, A079 236 239 (BIA July 18, 2017)
 U.S. Department of Justice Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals
... Executive Office for Immigration Review

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

File: A079 236 239 - Arlington, VA Date:

JUL 1 8 2017
In re: Alhaji Shoku LAMIN a.k.a. Derick Koroma

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

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

MOTION

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Thomas H. Tousley, Esquire

APPLICATION: Reopening; reconsideration

ORDER:

On May 4, 2017, the respondent, a native and citizen of Sierra Leone, submitted a "motion to
reconsider and to reopen," also seeking a stay of removal in proceedings in which the Board
dismissed his appeal on April 26, 2005. The record is remanded.

Whether treated as a motion to reopen or one seeking reconsideration, the respondent's motion
is untimely filed. Sections 240(c)(6), (7) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C.
1229a(c)(6), (7); 8 C.F.R. 1003.2(b), (c)(2). However, he asks that we sua sponte reopen
and/or reconsider proceedings as he contends that the Board erred in finding that he was ineligible
for adjustment of status as he did not make a lawful entry into the United States (Motion at 3-9).
8 C.F.R. 1003.2(a). He also has provided evidence demonstrating that he married a United States
citizen in 2012, is the beneficiary of an approved visa petition she filed on his behalf, and that they
have a United States citizen child, born July 3, 2014 (Motion at 8, Tabs F-J). In addition, he has
submitted medical records showing that he has sickle cell disease, as well as evidence regarding
the lack of readily available treatment in Africa for this condition (Motion at 9, Tabs K-N).

The Department of Homeland Security has not opposed the respondent's motion. In view of
the totality of the record, we find that sua sponte reopening is warranted. Matter ofJ-J-, 21 I&N
Dec. 976 (BIA 1997). As noted, the respondent is the beneficiary of an approved visa petition.
We recognize that in our 2005 decision we found that the respondent had not shown he had been
inspected and admitted for purposes of adjustment under section 245(a) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act. 8 U.S.C. 1255(a). However, subsequent to that decision the Board held that in
order to show that he has been "admitted" to the United States pursuant to section 101(a)(l3)(A)
of the Act, an applicant for adjustment of status under section 245(a) of the Act need show only
procedural regularity. Matter of Quilantan, 25 l&N Dec. 285 (BIA 2010). As we find that
reopening is warranted, on remand the Immigration Judge should address the respondent's
eligibility for adjustment of status. Accordingly, the record is remanded to the Immigration Judge
for further proceedings.

Cite as: Alhaji Shoku Lamin, A079 236 239 (BIA July 18, 2017)