Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Issue: IMMIGRATION

IMMIGRATION Immigrant Worker; Status; Jurisdiction

 

Where an immigrant worker from India challenged the revocation of an I-140 petition arguing that the petition was revoked without disclosure of the basis for revocation as required, district courts lack jurisdiction to consider whether the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services failed to comply with disclosure requirements, so the claim was properly dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and the worker was also not statutorily eligible to adjust status. Judgment is affirmed.

14-3623 Rajasekaran v. Hazuda , appealed from the District of Nebraska,  Benton, J.

 

 

IMMIGRATION Naturalization; Aggravated Felony; Pointing A Gun

 

Where a citizen from Mexico, who was a lawful permanent resident of the U.S., pleaded guilty to pointing a gun at another person in violation of South Carolina law, the conviction constituted an aggravated felony, so the man’s application for naturalization was properly denied.

Judgment is affirmed.

14-3797 Reyes-Soto v. Lynch, appealed from the Eastern District of Missouri, Shepherd, J.

IMMIGRATION Removal Continuous Presence

 

Where an immigration judge found that a Mexican immigrant’s absences from the country totaled 183 days, the immigrant was properly found to be ineligible for cancellation of removal because he did not establish a continuous presence as required. Petition denied.

14-3030 Torres-Balderas v. Lynch, Petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Melloy, J.)

IMMIGRATION Removal; Hardship; Jurisdiction

 

Where an immigrant from Honduras who sought cancellation of removal argued that the immigration judge and Board of Immigration Appeals failed to consider evidence of the exceptional and extremely unusual hardship that his children would suffer if he were removed, the claim amounted to a challenge to how the agency weighed the evidence, so the claim was outside of the appellate court’s jurisdiction to review. Petition dismissed.

14-3873 Lemuz-Hernandez v. Lynch, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, per curiam.

IMMIGRATION Removal; New Evidence

 

Where immigrants from Gambia who married while their appeals were pending moved to remand their cases to the immigration judge, the court lacked jurisdiction to review the discretionary denial of waiver of inadmissibility, and since the immigrants were found to have engaged in an extensive fraudulent scheme, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in determining that allegedly new evidence was not credible and did not establish eligibility for asylum. Petition denied.

14-2858 Njie v. Lynch,  Petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Wollman, J.

IMMIGRATION Status Adjustment; Waiver Of Application; Unprepared Petitioner

 

Where an immigration judge warned an immigrant from Kenya who sought a status adjustment to pay a filing fee, get fingerprinted, submit an affidavit of support and bring his wife to testify at his next hearing and the immigrant did none of the above, the judge did not abuse his discretion in deeming his application waived and in denying his request for a continuance. Petition denied.

14-2924 Choge v. Lynch, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Kelly, J.