Department of Justice
Executive Office for Immigration Review
A 076-317-461
Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case.
Sincerely,
DonnL c
t1AA)
Donna Carr
Chief Clerk
Enclosure
Panel Members:
Adkins-Bianch i Charles K.
Mann i Ana
O'Connor, Blair
Userteam: Docket
Flores, Moises
Youman Madeo & Fasano
4808 Bergenline Avenue, Suite 402
Union City, NJ 07087
Date:
DEC 2 9 2016
APPEAL
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Moises A. Flores, Esquire
APPLICATION: Reopening
The respondent has appealed the Immigration Judge's decision dated January 6, 2016,
denying her motion to reopen. The Immigration Judge had previously ordered the respondent
removed in a bsentia for her failure to appear at the hearing on Decem ber 15, 1997. We review
an Immigration Judge's findings of fact for clear error, but questions of law, discretion, and
judgment, and all other issues in appeals, de novo. 8 C.F.R. 1003.l(d)(3)(i), (ii). The
Department of Homeland Security has not filed an opposition to the respondent's motion or an
appeal. Upon our de novo review, in light of the totality of the circumstances presented in this
matter, including the respondent's age when she was put into removal proceeding, her TPS
status since 2000, and her family situation, we will sustain the appeal and reopen the proceedings
to allow the respondent another opportunity to appear for a hearing. Accordingly, the following
order will be entered.
ORDER: The respondent's appeal is sustained, the proceedings are reopened, the in a bsentia
removal order is rescinded, and the record is remanded to the Immigration Court for further
proceedings consistent with the foregoing opinion and the entry of a new decision.
Cite as: Doris Yesenia Garcia-Enamorado, A076 317 461 (BIA Dec. 29, 2016)
IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
-,
FILE A 076-317-461
IN THE MATTER OF
GARCIA-ENAMORADO, DORIS YESENIA
OURT
IMMIGRATION COURT
0
FF
tt.. i.
HARLINGEN, TEXA
GARCIA-ENAMORADO, DORIS
YESENIA
RESPONDENT
APPLICATIONS:
)
)
)
)
)
Janu ,2016
Case Number: A 076-317-461
In Removal Proceedings
Motion to Reopen
IN THE MATTER OF
Here, the respondent's motion was filed more than fifteen years after she was ordered removed
in absentia. The motion does not assert that the motion is su bject to any of the exceptions to the
90-day filing deadline, nor does the record support such a finding.
David Ayala
United States Imm1
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
THIS DOCUMENT WAS SERVED BY: MA
)
)( ERSONAL SERV
p 1-1$
TO: ) ALIEN
(
( ) IEN C/0 CUSTODIA LIEN'
\:= 4
DATE:
'4
BY: COURT AFF --------'---------ATTACH!vl. N S: () EOIR-33 ( ) EOIR-28
LEGAL
()
SERVICES LIST OTHER
APPEAL FORMS
The Court also declines to exercise its sua sponte authority to reopen the respondent's
removal proceedings. See Matter ofJ-J, 21 I&N Dec. 976 (BIA 1997). The respondent has not
demonstrated any extraordinary circumstances that warrant reopening sua sponte. 8 C.F .R.
1003.23(b)( l). The Court's sua sponte authority to reopen is not intended as a method by which
aliens can circumvent filing deadlines imposed by the Act and regulations.