Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Liu (not precedential): BIA Must Consider Evidence in Motion To Reopen

Liu v. Holder
Not Precedential
April 23, 2009

Judges Rendell, Greenberg, and Van Antwerpen. Per Curiam decision.

Theodore N. Cox of New York, NY for Ms. Liu. Drew C. Brinkman for OIL and the government.

As with Zheng v. Mukasey, 549 F.3d 260, 264-65 (3d Cir. 2008), the BIA may not deny a motion to reopen without mentioning key evidence supporting the argument to reopen a case because of changed country circumstances.

There is no question that the BIA ignored 6 pieces of evidence supporting the motion to reopen and only addressed 3 other pieces of evidence by tersely referring to a previous BIA decision. It is disappointing that the BIA broke the rules by not considering the evidence in the motion to reopen. The BIA should make its decisions based on the evidence in the case, not in a way that is unrelated to what the parties have submitted.

IJ Henry S. Dogin made the ruling in immigration court on the case, but the Third Circuit solely criticized the BIA's analysis of the motion to reopen and did not criticize in any way IJ Dogin.


Blogger YW said...

Listmates at Solosez from the American Bar Association are curious about who is responsible for this excellent blog. I just started my own blog today.

10:12 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home