Frederick Monyoncho Kerina, A093 442 983 (BIA Apr. 24, 2012)

8/13/2019 Frederick Monyoncho Kerina, A093 442 983 (BIA Apr. 24, 2012)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/frederick-monyoncho-kerina-a093-442-983-bia-apr-24-2012 1/10

Ogueri, GabrielOgueri & Associates P.C5646 Milton Street Suite 7 45Dalas TX 75206

U Dptmnt of Jutic

Excutive Oc r Imgraon Rw

Board oflmmigtio ppesQce o h Cek

517 lcsrg Pk Suite JOO(/·/\ Cm:h Vgna O I

HS/ICE Oice of Chief Counsel - DAL125 E. John Carpenter Fwy, Ste. Irving TX 75622324

Name: KERINA FREDRCK MONYOCO A093442983

Date o this notice 4/24/2012

ncosd s a cop of h Brd's dcson nd der n th abo-rfrncd c.

ncosur

Pan Mmbrs:Knda-Car MoMn s LMr N P

Snrey,

Donna CarrCh Clerk

Cite as: Frederick Monyoncho Kerina, A093 442 983 (BIA Apr. 24, 2012)



U�S JuE O rmgR

B m A

Fl h Vr

Fl: A093 42 83 - Dall,

FCK MOONCHO A

EMOVL PROCGS

CTICATION

Dat

ON B F SPODT bl Ogu Esqu

N BEHLF F DHS Magt M. Pc Assisant Chif Counsl

PLICATION Ronsidon pning

APR . 4 201

Th spondnt appd om h Immiaon Judg's ch 16 2011 dcision dnngis moon to consid To avoid any issu gding tmlinss of t spondnts app th Bod ll jusdcon ov ts appal by con See 8 CF 10032(a) T Iion Jdgs dision b vs t poes w b pn d th d b d

On ob 25 2010 o days bfo h n scduld hang is cas Ion Judg issd a n dision nding that th spondnt ad abdond sapplcaons lack of poscution nd 8 CFR 1003(c), bcaus d to bit ispons by th Ocob 13, 2010, d s by h Imiaon Jdg viwing thd w psad ta t Ion Jdg impoply nt a n od ding l if bn abdon d th t iaon Judgs don dnying

h moon o onsid dpn th pocdings A w of th d of th ng which t Imaon Judg impos a d h submssion of applions vals nodiscussion of olnt dp Th spondnt had howv a pio tn moton ontinuanc� pssd a dsi to psu olunt dpu could not pusu adjusmntUnd th ci cs, w h no m o submit o apply olny dpa t

Imion Judg should not hav issu a n dsion nding l applons abandonhout povidng th pondnt t oppo o pus is applcaon vol dpa Tus, w n tat h Oob 2, 2010 n dision was o, and tatnsidaton d pning wrd

addion th miation Jdg's Oob 25, 2010 od sats t 8 CFR 00331( c) is "dato not disona d tat th on Judg no coic bt

Th Iion Judg const spondns oon bot onsidon d to

opn podngsCite as: Frederick Monyoncho Kerina, A093 442 983 (BIA Apr. 24, 2012)



A093 2 983

to nd th appicaons don, d h Iaion Judg ritrtd is undsdg n thdon dnng rspodnt's motion (IJ 5-6 & .3) Th Bod ld tt th Immition Jdgs v broad discron to conduc d conol io proegs cdig to to lig ds r pplictons d t docmnts. e Maer ofInte

Rosa 25 N D 264, 265 200) T ppicbl rgulo so lows t io Judg th scrtion to nd ds See 8 CFR § 0033l(c);see ao, e.g. Dedi v. Mukey525 F3d 187 (2d C 2008) (holdig in p t th miaon Jdg hd discro to datom g ds i oc ls) Whthr a ng ddlin should b d is a qion ofjdnt d discron tt Bod riws d novo See 8 CFR 003 (d)(3)(i) iscs, mao Judg pps to hv dcind to csidr whr a rsobl xlon bn prod, or good cus d bn sho, r th iur to l th admnt pplicon by t dlin bc ws ndr t spprhsion tt t ws mdto r to d h ilr to mt th dadli rr to d th oppoity to aplicaio wivdOn d novo ri, d nsidring th tot of th circmstcs prsnt in t motio d opp, w d it appropiat to alow rspondnt otr opport to sbmit s applicatio

r dunt of stus on rmd

w of h rgong, w w rvs th Iaio Judgs dcisio� r tspro gs d rmd to low rspondnt oppori to pr b vont dpurd t of stts Accrdigly, llowng ordr wll b ntrd

OE: Th Imion dg's dision is rvrs ths rmov procdngs ropnd d h rord is r dd to Iition Cou r r procings

FO BOAD

2



NITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JSTCE

EXECTVE OFFCE FOR MMGRATON RVEW

MMGATON COURT

DALLAS, TEXAS

I THE A TER OF: ))

KENA FREDERCK MONYOMCHO )) I REOVAL PROCEEDINGS

RESPONDEN A 093-442983

CRGES:

APPLCATON

Secton 237 ()(l)(B) of the Immgrton nd NtiontAct s mende, in tht er dmsson s nonmmntner Secton (() of the Act yo hve remined in

the Unted Stes r time longer thn permtted, nvotion of hs Act or ny oter lw n he United States

otion to Reconsier & to Reopen 1

ON BEAF OF TE RSPONDENT ON BAF OF TE

DEPARTMN OF HOMELAND

SECURTYGbrie Ogueri, EsqOguer & Assoctes, PC5646 ilton Seet # 745

Dls TX 75206

Mrgret Prce Esq.Asst. Cef Consel- ICE125 E John Cpenter Fwy Ste 500

rving X 750622324

ORDER OF THE COURT

e Responent hs le oton to Reconsider nd to Reopen the bove-

cptioned cse. For the llowing resons the Moton wi be DEND.

See "Legal Sandards, i. Whe the Moton s tted Moton to Reconsde t aso has characestcscommon to Motons to Reopen



WREN DECISON OF HE M M GR AON J UDGE

FA CTUAL A ND PROCEDURA L HSOR Y

he Respondent is a mae, ative and citizen of Keya Exhiit I On or aout

Jue 4, 2003 the espondet w admied ito te Uited States as a oiiant

visitor, with authoizatio to remai in the Uited States r a teporay peiod not to

exceed Deceer 3, 2003 he espodent remaied i the Uited States eyod

Deceer 3 2003 witout authoriation o the Goveent

O Octoer 7, 2009 the Deptment of Hoeland Security (DHS or the

Goveent sent to te espodent, y cetied ail, a Notice to Appea (NA,

chaging him wit removaiiy uder Section 23(a((B of the Act, i that aer

adissio as a noniigrat, he remaied in te Uited States r a time loger tha

peied

At a hearing on Juy 28, 2010, the espodet appeaed ere te Cout, wth

counse, ad aditted the Goveet's alegations and coceded the charge of

removaility hus the Cour nd the espondet reovale y clear, unequivocal,

ad covicing evdece See NA § 240(c(3(A he espodet declied to

desigate a coutry of reova, ad the Cour desigated his coutry of remova as

Kenya At the hearing the Cout set the Respodets deadie r sumitting any

applicatios r relief as Octoer 13, 200, pursuat to 8 CFR § 10033(c

e Respondent did not sumit any applicatios r reief y te Octoer 13th

deadlie Accordingl on Octoer 25 200 the our deeed that the espondet hd

waived he opportuniy to suit y application r reief See 8 C § 10033(c

("he migratio Judge ay set ad extend tie limits r the lig of appicatios ad

2



eated doun and repone threo, f n f an ppton or douen not led

wthn the e e th graton Judge, the oppoun to hat appaon o

dount shal e ded waed (epha ddd

On Otor 2, 200 the Cout oded hat he pondent appaton

eef e ded aandond puruant o 8 CF.. § 10033(, and oded th

pondent reod o Kna

On Nor 7, 2010 he epondn ud the peen Moton to

ondr and o Reopn n h Moon, he agu that h ae houd ropnd

eaue h attoe akenl hough the ppon wa du on Oor 27, 2010, h

date of h next heang Ao n h Moton h requtd tha h Cour opn h

podng o he an ppl r adjuent of au aed upon a pendng Pon r

Alen eae (For 30 ed he epondnt Untd Stae n (USC w

ponden Moton o onde and o opn dated Noe 17, 20 0

On Nor 2, 200 the pondnt uted an Andent o h Moton

to ondr and to Reopn, qutng h the Cou opn h e o he an app

r adutnt o ttu aed upon h newl-pprod -130 Pton d h USC

poue. epondnt' Moon o eonder, datd Noe 17, 2010

The DS dd not ut a pone

EG TND

Moton ued to he graton Court a ontued aodng o onen,

rah than ttle raton Court Prate Manul, Ch 5 p 86 Th prn Motn

whe ttld Moton to Ronder, ha harater oon to oton o ropen

hu, the Court trea th Moton a oth n t ana

3



A. Motio to ecosder

A otion to reconside is a reest that the Co reexaine its decision in ight

of additional lega agents a change of law o an age or aspect of the case

which was overooked Matter of Ramos, 23 & N Dec 336 338 (BA 2002

(oting Matter of Cerna 20 & N ec 399 402 n2 (BA 1991 A otion to

reconside alleges that at the tie of the Cots pevios decision an ero was ade; it

estions the Corts decision r alleged errors in appraising the cts and the aw

Matter of Cea, 20 & N. ec a 402. When the Cort econsiders a decision it is in

eect placing itself ack in tie and considering the case as thogh a decision on the

ecod had neve een entered The very nate of a otion to econsider is that the

original decision was decive in soe regad

hs a otion to reconsider st state the reasons r the otion y speciing

the eos of ct or aw in the Cot's prior decision and st e sppoed y pertinent

ahoity. 8 CF. § 100323((2 A oion o reconside s e led within 30 days

of the date of entry of a na adinistative orde of reova deportation or exclsion.

8 C § 100323(( A respondent ay ony e one otion to econsider

B. Motion to eope

A oion to eopen the purpose of providing he alien an opportnity to apply

any of discretionary relief will not e ganed if i appears that the alien's gh

to apply sch relief was ly expained o hi y the igration dge and a

ootity theere was aoe a the hearing ness he reief is sogh n e asis

of cicstances that have aisen sseent to the hearing 8 C. § 100323((3 A

otion o eopen wi not e granted ness the igration dge is satised that the

4



evidence sought to be oeed s mte nd ws not vie and coud not hve been

discoveed o pesented t the rme heing I

A

immg tion judge hs bod uthoriy to gant o den moton to eopen

INS v. Doher 502 S 34, 322 (992) A immigtion judge m deny motion

even whee hee s pima facie egbity elef, f the eef sought wod be denied

a mtte of dscetion INS v Rios-Pineda 47 US 444 449 (1985) A espondent

must theee estbls prima facie case the ndelying substantve eef soght

nd must sho tht he wrnts eief n the execise of disceton o is moton to

eopen be dened See e.g I v. Abudu 485 U.S 94 (988); INS v. Doher 502

US 34 35-16 (992) A espondent equestng motion to eopen bers "evy

bden. ee Matter of Coelho, 20 I. & N Dec 464, 472 (JA 992) Mater of Pena

Diaz 20 I & Dec 84, 844 (JA 994)

The Cout my execse ts sua sponte utoty to eopen in tu exception

situtons whee the inteests of justce od be seved. Maer of GD 22 I& N

Dec 32 (BJA. 1999); see also Maer of 2 I & Dec 976 (JA 997)

(hoding tt the Court s dscetion to eopen cse sua spone; oweve, tht

dscetion s mited to cses wee excepton cicumstnces e demonstted)

A. Moton to Reconsider

ANALYSIS

To te extent tht te pesent Motion s Motion to Reconsde th e Respondent

hs not met hs buden The Respondent does not specfy ny eos of ct o in the

Cout's po decsion Rte, the Respondent sttes tht hs ttoe mde miste-

tht hs toe egedy thougt he ppicton ws due on Octobe 27 2010, he

5



Respondent's next hearing date, instead of October 13 2010, the date set on the record by

te Cou2 Wie the Court is sympatetic to the espondent he as not sown or even

suggested tat te Cous decision was dective3

B Motion to Ropn

To te extent that the present Motion is a motion to reopen, 8 CF §

100323(b)3) precludes the Court om reopening the proceedings he Court y

afrded te espondent an opportunity to appy r adjustment of status See id Wie

the -30 Petition was approved aer the Courts order, the Cort ad peritted the

espondent to appy r Adjustment of Status as e awaited the -130 Petitions approval

Tat te I-30 was approved aer the Courts order does not aect wether te

Respondent ad te opportuity to appy r adustment of status bere te Court

In addition, whie the espondent argues that is attoeys mistake precuded

him om submitting his application in a tiey anner te espondent as not aeged

ineective assistnce of counsel

Finay, the Cort nds tat tis case does not present a trly eceptona

situation where the interests of ustice woud demand a reopening of te proceedings

CONCLUSION

Accordingy, the owing order wi e entered

2 Notably, the Respondent has not alleged ineectve assistance of counsel3 Wile the Cou s not obligated to defend its prior decision s noted n ts decson dated October 25,2010 8 C.FR § 03.3 (c) s a mandato eguation d povdes that a Court shal deem an applcationabdoned the Cou's ing date that appcation s not met

6



\'. - ( .

OE

IT HEEBY OEED that the Responden's Min Recnsider is

DENIED

is / ,� day f arh, 20

Frederick Monyoncho Kerina, A093 442 983 (BIA Apr. 24, 2012)

Documents

Transcript of Frederick Monyoncho Kerina, A093 442 983 (BIA Apr. 24, 2012)