Sunteți pe pagina 1din 2

U.S.

Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board ofImmigration Appeals Office ofthe Clerk


5107 Leesburg Pike. Suite 2000 Falls Church, Virginia 21041

ALFARO-SERRANO, BLANCA LIDIA 2687 1/2 W. PICO BLVD LOS ANGELES, CA 90006

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel 1717 Zoy Street Harlingen, TX 78552

HLG

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Name: ALFARO-SERRANO, BLANCA LI...

A 098121-479

Date of this notice: 10/2512012

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order Sincerely,

in the above-referenced case.

DOYlrtL caftAJ
Donna Carr Chief Clerk

Enclosure
Panel Members: Adkins-Blanch, Charles K. Hoffman, Sharon Manuel, Elise L.

Trane Userteam: Docket

Cite as: Blanca Lidia Alfaro-Serrano, A098 121 479 (BIA Oct. 25, 2012)

U.S. Department of Justice


Executive Office for Imm igration Review falls Church, V

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

pa

22041

File: Jn re:

A098 121 479- Harlingen, TX BLANCA LIDIA ALFARO-SERRANO

Date:

OCT. li'ttll

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS APPEAL

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF DHS:

Pro

se

Nicole M. Gonzalez Assistant Chief Counsel

APPLICATION: Reopening

ORDER: The respondent's appeal of the decision of the Immigration Judge, issued April I, 2011, denying her motion to reopen is sustained, these removal proceedings are reopened, and the record is remanded to the Immigration Court for further proceedings. The Immigration Judge ordered the respondent, a native and citizen of El Salvador, removed, in absentia, in September 2004, without providing her notice of the hearing because she was deemed
to have failed to provide an address where she could be contacted.

See sections 240(b)(5)(A), (B) of the hnmigration and Nationality Act, 8 U .S.C. l 229a(b)(5)(A), (B); Gomez-Palacios v. Holder,

560 F.Jd 354, 360-61 (5th Cir. 2009). However, the Record of Deportable I Inadmissible Alien (Form 1-213) indicates that, upon her apprehension by Border Patrol agents in July 2004, the respondent provided an address in "Chantille," Virginia (Exh. 2). I Considering these circumstances, we conclude that the September 2004 removal order should be rescinded as the respondent did not receive notice of her hearing in accordance with section 239 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1229. See section 240(b)(5)(C)(ii) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1229a(b)(5)(C)(ii).

It appears that the respondent was referring to Chantilly, Virginia.

Cite as: Blanca Lidia Alfaro-Serrano, A098 121 479 (BIA Oct. 25, 2012)

S-ar putea să vă placă și