Rauda

Rauda v. Mukasey

Good Law
265 F. App'x 456
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 22, 2008No. 05-74185California330 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Jose C. Rauda, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) adopting and affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his motion to reopen proceedings in which he was ordered deported in absentia. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion, Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1187 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc), and we grant the petition for review in part, deny it in part, and remand.

The BIA abused its discretion in denying Rauda’s motion to reopen because the Department of Homeland Security has the burden of establishing that Rauda was properly served with the Order to Show Cause (“OSC”). See 8 U.S.C. § 1252b(e)(l) (1995). We note that the IJ’s decision incorrectly applied Matter of Grijalva, 21 I. & N. Dec. 27, 32 (BIA 1995) (en banc), by employing a presumption of delivery of Rauda’s OSC that is proper only for notices of hearing. See Chaidez v. Gonzales, 486 F.3d 1079, 1085 (9th Cir. *457 2007). Accordingly, we remand for reconsideration of Rauda’s claim under the proper legal standards. Cf. id. at 1087 (holding that the signature on the OSC…

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.