Torres

MEMORANDUM **

Dinna Jorilla Torres (“Torres”) petitions for review from a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming a decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Torres’s motion to rescind or reopen an order of removal entered in absen-tia. We grant the petition for review and remand. Because the facts are familiar to the parties, we recount them only as necessary to explain our decision.

1. Torres has not explained how or why it was “mandatory” that she prepare for the civil lawsuit deposition at the same time that her removal hearing was scheduled to take place. Nor has she explained — assuming the “mandatory” nature of this deposition preparation — why she did not notify the IJ before the hearing to request rescheduling. The BIA did not, therefore, abuse its discretion by concluding that Torres’s decision to attend the deposition preparation in lieu of the scheduled hearing did not qualify as an “exceptional circumstance” that was “beyond [her] control.” 8 U.S.C. §§ 1229a(b)(5)(C), (e)(1).

2. The Form 1-213 proffered by the INS as evidence of Torres’s removability does not state that Torres is removable (or that she conceded that she is) or that she…