Sarbjit Singh v. Gonzales

I. BACKGROUND

Sarbjit Singh, a native and citizen of India, was charged as removable on the ground that he had overstayed his visa. Singh retained attorney Samuel Maina and applied for asy- lum, withholding of removal and Convention Against Torture relief. Each of Singh’s claims were rejected after a hearing in which the immigration judge (“IJ”) found him not credible and ordered his removal.

With Maina’s assistance, Singh filed a Notice of Appeal with the BIA using form EOIR-26. In the section requesting the petitioner to “[s]tate in detail the reason(s) for [the] appeal,” Maina wrote the following: “IJ erred in finding respondent was not credible and failed to carry his burden.” Immediately above Maina’s statement, the form contained the following conspicuous admonition: “WARNING: The failure 8806 SINGH v. GONZALES to specify the factual or legal basis for the appeal may lead to summary dismissal without further notice unless you give specific details in a timely, separate written brief or statement filed with the board.” Maina checked the box on the form, termed “Item #6,” indicating that he intended to file a separate written brief to comply with the…