8/21/2019 M-G-M-M-, AXXX XXX 194 (BIA June 1, 2015)

1/6

Erwin. Anna

Kuck Immigration Partners

365 Northridge Rd. Suite 300

Atlanta. GA 30350

U S

Department of Justice

Executive Onice for Immigration Review

Board o mmigration Appeals

Office o he Clerk

j 07 /.e sburg 1'1/ce. Suite innn

oils

Church l trg1111u }OSJO

DHSIICE Office

of

Chief Counsel - A TL

180

Spring

Street. Sui te 332

Atlanta

G

30303

Name: M M . M G A 194

Date of this notice: 6/1/2015

Enclosed is a copy

of

the Board s decision and order in the above-referenced case.

Enclosure

Panel Members:

Holmes

David

B

Sincerely,

Donn L c

v . J

Donna Carr

Chief

Clerk

Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visitwww.irac.net/unpublished/index/

  g

  g

  p  p

Cite as: M-G-M-M-, AXXX XXX 194 (BIA June 1, 2015)

8/21/2019 M-G-M-M-, AXXX XXX 194 (BIA June 1, 2015)

2/6

U.

S. Depa rtm en

t

of

Jus t ice 

Executiv

e Office

for

Im

migration Review

Decis

ion of h

e

Boa

rd of Immigration

Appeals

Falls Church

,

Virginia 2

0530

File:

194 - A

tlanta. GA 

I

n re:

-M

 

IN REMO

VAL PROCEE

DINGS

AP

PEAL

Date:

 

ON BEHAL

F

O

RESPON

DENT: Ann

a Erwin, Esqu

ire

CHAR

GE:

UN 01201

5

Notice:

Sec. 212(a )

(4)(A), l&N A

ct 8 U.S.C. 

I 182(a)(4)(A)]

 -

Public charge

Sec. 

212(a)(7)(A)( i

)(I), I&N Act 8

U.S.C. I 18

2(a)(7)(A)(i)(I

)] -

Im mig r

ant - no valid i

mm igrant visa or

entry docum

ent

APPLICATIO

N: Continu a

nce

The responde

nt, a native  an

d citizen of E

l Salvador,  ap

peals from th e

 Imm igration

Judge's

decision d

ated Septemb

er 23, 2014, d

enying her  re

quest for a  co

ntinuance an d

  ordering her

 

rem

oved. The rec

ord will be rem

anded.

We  re

view for clear

  error the find

ings

of

fact,

including the

detenninatio n

 

o

f credibility

,

made b

y the Immigra

tion Judge. 8 C

.F.R. 1003. l

(d)(3)(i). W e

review de novo

 all othe r issue

s,

inclu

ding whether

the parties hav

e met the rele

vant burden of

proof, and i

ssues

of

discre

tion.

8 C

.F.R. I003.

1 (d)(3)(ii).

On Sep

tember 23,  20

14, the respo

ndent provid e

d the Immig r

ation Judge w

ith a brie f

rega r

ding her eligib

ility for Spec

ial Immigrant

Juvenile ( SIJ

  ) status, as w

ell a Peti tion

  for

Legitimation a

nd Modificatio

n

of

Custody

that had been

filed in Georg

ia state court (

Tr. at 3).

The respo n

dent requested

  a continuan c

e pending the

  adjudication of

 this petition

, which, she

argued

, ifgranted, w o

uld serve as th

e predicate ord

er for an SIJ s

tatus petition.

The Departm e

nt

of H

omeland Secu

rity ( DHS  ) o

pposed the co

ntinuance, arg u

ing that, unde

r Georgia state

  law,

a petition for deprivation  will not

be

gr anted where  th e  child remain s in the custo dy

of

one

parent (T

r. at 3-4).

1

ee former 0 .C .

G.A. 15-11 -

2(8) (West 201

3) (setting for

th the defmitio

n

of a

deprived child

  ). The Immi

gration Judge

declined to  c

ontinue proce e

dings, noting

the

DHS's oppo

sition and sta

ting that, in th

e state

of

 Ge

orgia. custo d

y by one par e

nt does not

q

ualify for Spec

ial Imm igran t

 Juvenile Statu

s (I.J. t 2) . 

We note that

HB 242, 2013

-2014 Leg., R

eg. Sess. (G a

. 2013) chang

ed the definit

ion of

deprived ch i

ld (now depe

ndent child  ) e

ffective Janua

ry 1 2014. ee

O.C.G.A.  1

5-11-2(22) 

(West 2014) .

 

            

      p  p         

       

            

Cite as: M-G-M-M-, AXXX XXX 194 (BIA June 1, 2015)

8/21/2019 M-G-M-M-, AXXX XXX 194 (BIA June 1, 2015)

3/6

 194

Although there is no fonnal requirement for the Immigration Judge to list each factual

finding, an oral decision must accurately summarize the relevant facts, reflect the Immigration

Judge's analysis

o

the applicable statutes, regulations, and legal precedents, and clearly set forth

the Immigration Judge's legal conclusions.

Matier

o

A-P-

22 I&N Dec. 468 (BIA 1999). The

Immigration Judge's decision, as presently constituted, does not provide us with a meaningful

basis for appellate review.

See generally Matter o/S-H-

23 l&N Dec. 462, 463-65 (BIA 2002)

(stating that Immigration Judges should include in their decisions clear and complete findings

o

fact that are supported by the record and are in compliance with controlling law). The

respondent stated on the record and argued in her brief that she was not seeking an order o

dependency (or deprivation, under the former state code) from the state court, but instead an

order granting her father sole custody, which would then serve as a predicate order for

SU

status.

See section 101(a)(27)(J)

o

the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C.

§

110l(a)(27)(J)

(requiring that an alien seeking SU status e declared dependent on a juvenile court or placed

under the custody

o

an individual ). The Immigration Judge's decision did not address this

argument.

Accordingly,

we

will remand the record for Immigration Judge to consider this argument,

and determine whether good cause exists for a continuance. See 8 C.F.R. §§ I 003.29, 1240.6:

Matter

o

Hashmi 24 l&N Dec. 785 (BIA 2009) (discussing the factors to be considered in

detennining whether good cause exists to continue proceedings to await adjudication o a

family-based visa petition). We note that, absent evidence

o

an alien's ineligibility for SJJ

status,

an

Immigration Judge should, as a general practice, continue or administratively close

proceedings to await adjudication o a pending state proceeding that could serve as a predicate

order for SIJ status.2 On remand, the respondent will provide the court with updated information

regarding the status

o

her state court petition.

Accordingly, the record will e remanded as set forth below.

ORDER: The record is remanded to the Immigration Judge for further proceedings and the

entry o a new decision.

~

FOR THE BOARD

2

We separately note that guidance provided to Immigration Judges by the Chief Immigration

Judge states that i an unaccompanied child is seeking SU status, .. the case must be

administratively closed or reset for that process to occur in state or juvenile court.''

Memorandum from Brian M O'Leary, Chief Immigration Judge, to Immigration Judges

(Mar. 24, 2015) (Docketing Practices Relating

to

Unaccompanied Children Cases and Adults

with Children Released on Alternatives to Detention Cases in Light o he New Priorities).

2

      g           g     p  p         

       

            

Cite as: M-G-M-M-, AXXX XXX 194 (BIA June 1, 2015)

8/21/2019 M-G-M-M-, AXXX XXX 194 (BIA June 1, 2015)

4/6

U

NITED STATE

S DEPARTM

ENT OF JUST

ICE

E

XECUTIVE O

FFICE FOR IM

MIGRATION

 REVIEW 

UNITE

D STATES IM

MIGRATION C

O U R T

ATLANT

A, GEO R GIA

File:

19 4

 

In the M

atter of

)

M

 

)

)

RESPONDE

NT

)

CH

ARGES:

Section 21

2 a) 6){A) i).

APPLICA

TIONS: Co

ntinuance.

ON

BEHALF OF R

ESPONDENT

: ANNA IRWIN

 

ON

BEHALF

O 

OH S: KELLEY

N

SYDNOR 

September 23

, 2014

IN REM OVAL

 PROCEEDIN

GS

ORAL DE

CISION OF TH

E IMMIGRAT

ION JUD G E

The respon

dent is a fema

le native and c

itizen o El Sa

lvador who w

as placed in

remova

l proceedings

with the filing

o a Notice to A

ppear w ith th

e Cour t chargi

ng

re

m

ovability purs

uant to the pro

visions

o 

212

 a) 6) A)  i)

o

t

he INA Exhib

it 1 . Th e

respond

ent filed writte

n pleadings ac

knowledging p

roper service

o the Notice

to

Appear, admitting the factual allegations Exhibit 2). Along with the

1 213

Exhibit 2), the

C

ourt would find

  that removabi

lity has been e

stablished by

clear and conv

incing

evidence 

The respon

dent was rele

ased from the

custody o th e

  ICE, Departm

ent o

 

1

 

             

     p  p         

       

            

8/21/2019 M-G-M-M-, AXXX XXX 194 (BIA June 1, 2015)

5/6

Homel

and Security, i

nto the custod

y o her father

, Juan Pablo

Mart inez  Quea

r. That

individua

l

s

present

n

C

ourt today.

The

respondent, th

rough counse

l, requests a c

ont inuance to

 apply fo r Spe

cial

Im m

igrant Juvenile

 Status. The

 Governm ent o

pposes that c

ontinuance, p

ointing out

that in

the state 

o

Ge

orgia, the cus

tody by one pa

rent does no

t quali fy for Sp

ecial

I

mmigrant Juve

nile Status. T

he Court dec

lines to continu

e the case fo

r a matte r that

 

does not appe

ar to be appro

vable, pursua

nt to the Cour

t s understand

ing and the

position o the

 Govern ment.

 

No othe

r relief w as re

quested.

ORD

ER

IT

 IS H ER EBY

ORDERED th

at the respond

ent is ordered

  remove d from

 the

United State

s to El Salvad

or on the cha

rge conta ined

in the Notice

to Appe ar.

sign ture

A

-194

teaase

efhe

next 12age

 

fo

r el

e troni

J. DAN P E

LLETIER

Immigratio

n Judge

Sept

ember 23, 201

4

             

     p  p         

       

            

8/21/2019 M-G-M-M-, AXXX XXX 194 (BIA June 1, 2015)

6/6

•

I s

l

Inunigration Judge 

J. 

D N

PELLETIER 

pe l

le t i

j

on Apr

il

1

2

15 t

 7:0

3 PM

 

GMT

 

194 

S

epte

m be

r 23 

201

4

      g           g     p  p