Saturday, July 25, 2009

Makanast (Not Precedential): BIA Given Leeway To Conclude Lawyer's Mailing Did Not Include Motion For This Case

Makanast v. Holder
Not Precedential
May 29, 2009
Judges Barry, Smith, and Hardiman. Per Curiam.

Hard to understand what is going on with this case, but the BIA is free to conclude that a mailing did not include the motion that Parsekian & Solomon filed for someone. The short description does not really explain what is happening. Maybe that law firm filed a motion in a case for a different client and it suggests they never filed a motion for this case?

Perhaps the best practice would be to make a note of the receipt number for your mailing in some part of the filing, such as in a cover letter or scribbled on the cover sheet of the filing. Too little information to figure out what the significance of this case is.


Blogger Rex said...

No idea who usaimmigrationsupport dot com is, but I urge people never to use them. Someone keeps posting spam comments to try to drum up business for them. Please avoid them!

8:26 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home