Hernandez-Rodriguez

Hernandez-Rodriguez v. Ashcroft

Good Law
118 F. App'x 115
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 20, 2004No. 03-71712; Agency No. A75-101-883California339 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Felicitas Hernandez-Rodriguez petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of her motion to reopen for the purpose of presenting evidence supporting eligibility for cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1). We grant the petition and remand.

The BIA refused to reopen on the sole basis that Hernandez was granted thirty days to voluntarily depart and had failed to do so. As a result, said the BIA, she was barred from obtaining cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(d). The BIA reached that conclusion without prior notice to the parties and did not mention the now conceded fact that Hernandez did not post a departure bond within five days of the grant of voluntary departure. Her failure meant that the order was vacated automatically at the end of the fifth day and the removal order took effect the next *116 day. See 8 C.F.R. § 1240.26 (c)(3). Therefore, a strong argument can be made that Hernandez did not overstay a thirty day voluntary departure period at all; one did not exist. It appears that the BIA did not consider that issue; nor, as far as we can ascertain, has it previously considered the issue in a precedential ruling.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.