MARQUEZ-ROCHA, RUFINO

MORGAN COUNTY DETENTION

211 E. NEWTON
VERSAILLES, MO 65084
Name: MARQUEZ-ROCHA, RUFINO
U.S. Department of Justice
Executive Office for Immigration Review
Board of Immigration Appeals
Office of the Clerk
5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000
Falls Church, Virginia 22041
DHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel KAN
2345 Grand Blvd., Suite 500
Kansas City, MO 64108
A 201-073-660
Date of this notice: 1/29/2013
Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case.
Enclosure
Panel Members:
Holmes, David B.
Sincerely,
DonrtL c a.AA.J
Donna Carr
Chief Clerk
wi!iiarne
Userteam: Docket
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Rufino Marquez-Rocha, A201 073 660 (BIA Jan. 29, 2013)
, A
U.S. Department of Justice
Executive Office for Immigration Review
Falls Church, Virginia 22041
File: A201 073 660- Kansas City, MO
In re: RUFINO MARQUEZ-ROCHA
IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
APPEAL
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Pro se
ON BEHALF OF DHS:
ORDER:
Jayme Salinardi
Deputy Chief Counsel
Decision ofthe Board oflmmigration Appeals
Date: JAN 29Z013
The respondent, a native and citizen of Mexico, appeals from the October 2, 2012, summary
order of the Immigration Judge. The appeal will be dismissed.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) opposes the appeal as untimely filed. The
record reflects an appeal was due on or before November 1, 2012. The Notice of Appeal (NOA)
(Form EOIR-26) is signed and dated October 26, 2012, by the prose respondent. The envelope
in the record contains a partially legible date-stamp which reflects the NOA was mailed from the
detention facility on either October 28 or 29, 2012, and date-stamped as received at the Board on
November 2, 2012. However, the Board's offices were closed on October 29 and 30, 2012, due
to Hurricane Sandy, and the stamped receipt date may have been adversely affected by this
closure. Accordingly, we accept this appeal as timely filed.
The DHS also advises us that the respondent was removed from the United States to Mexico
on November 2, 2012. We find that we have jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal.
See Diaz-Garcia, 25 I&N Dec. 794 (BIA 2012) (the unlawful removal of an alien during the
pendency of a direct appeal from a removal order does not deprive the Board of jurisdiction to
review the appeal).
Turning to the merits of the respondent's appeal, we affirm the summary decision of the
Immigration Judge. We have reviewed the respondent's separate statement submitted on appeal.
The respondent does not dispute that he admitted the facts set forth on the Notice to Appear that
establish his removability, nor does the respondent dispute his removability as charged.
Although the respondent argues that he is eligible for cancellation of removal, he has not
demonstrated his prima facie eligibility for such relief. See Section 240A(b) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1229b(b). Further, his appeal challenges the fairness of an
apparent domestic violence case. However, he has not been charged with removability for a
domestic violence offense. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
~
FOR THE BOARD
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Rufino Marquez-Rocha, A201 073 660 (BIA Jan. 29, 2013)
In the Matter of:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
IMMIGRATION COURT
2345 GRAND BLVD., STE 525
KANSAS CITY, MO 64108
Case No.: A201-073-660
MARQUEZ-ROCHA, RUFINO
Docket: KANSAS CITY IMMIGRATION COURT -
DETAINED
RESPONDENT IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
ORDER OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE
Upon the basis of respondent's admissions, I have determined that the
respondent is subject to removal on the charge(s) in the Notice to Appear.
Respondent has made no application for relief from removal.
It is HEREBY ORDERED that the respondent be removed from the United States to
Mexico on the charge(s) contained in the Notice to Appear.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that if the aforenamed country advises the Attorney
General that it is unwilling to accept the respondent into its territory or
fails to advise the Attorney General within 30 days following original
inquiry whether it will or accept respondent into its territory,
respondent shall be removed to '::::t:f't&t} CO .
If you fail to appear for removal at the time and place ordered by the DHS,
other than because of exceptional circumstances beyond your control (such as
serious illness of the alien or death of an immediate relative of .the alien,
but not including less compelling circumstances), you will not be eligible for
the following forms of relief for a period of ten (10) years after the date
you were required to appear for removal:
(1) Voluntary departure as provided for in section 240B of the
Immigration and Nationality Act;
(2) Cancellation of removal as provided for in section 240A of the
Immigration and Nationality Act; and
(3) Adjustment of status or change of status as provided for in section
245, 248 or 249 of the Immigrcli:

I Immigration Judge
Appeal: Date: Oct 2, 2012
M.. /{-{-/ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
THIS DOCUMENT WAS,RVED BY: MAIL (M) PERSON ...p
TO: [ ALIEN c/o Custodial Officer [/] DHS
DATE: ROJ_J.,;. BY: COURT STAFF
[ ] EOIR-33 [ ] EOIR-28 [ ] Legal Services List [ ] Other 7X
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t