Singh

Singh v. Gonzales

Good Law
205 F. App'x 566
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 9, 2006No. 04-76234California368 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Boota Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions pro se for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) adopting and affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings in which he was ordered removed in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir.2002), we grant the petition for review and remand for further proceedings.

Singh submitted evidence with his motion to reopen that includes a report from a doctor he saw two days before the hearing “advisfing] complete bed rest for 10 days” to treat an acute lumbar sprain. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(1) (“A motion to reopen proceedings ... shall be supported by affidavits or other evidentiary material.”). Moreover, Singh’s evidence indicates that he arranged for the doctor’s report to be faxed to his former attorney on the morning of Monday September 11, 2003, before his 1 PM hearing. The IJ’s decision did not inform Singh that he should submit an affidavit by his attorney to validate the attorney’s claim that he notified the Immigration Court of Singh’s inability…

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.