Tadevosyan v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.
743 F.3d 1250
| 9th Cir. | 2014Background
- Tadevosyan, born in Iran and Armenian citizen, entered the U.S. on a non-immigrant visa in 2002 and overstayed.
- He married U.S. citizen Lyubov Smolyanyuk and filed an I-130 visa petition with a pending I-130.
- An immigration judge ordered his removal; he sought to reopen to pursue adjustment of status based on the pending I-130.
- DHS opposed the motion to reopen, arguing no approved visa petition and insufficient evidence to show not a public charge.
- The BIA denied the motion to reopen, relying on DHS opposition; USCIS later approved the I-130 petition during petition review by this court.
- The court granted the petition for review, remanding for further consideration; other petitions for review were dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the BIA abuse discretion by giving dispositive weight to DHS opposition? | Tadevosyan | DHS opposition to reopening should not dispositively deny on its own | Yes, BIA abused discretion by treating opposition as veto. |
| Under Velarde/related standards, did the motion to reopen merit consideration on the merits with prima facie evidence? | Tadevosyan showed prima facie eligibility via Abrahamian affidavit and tax evidence | DHS objections alone justified denial | Yes, BIA erred by not evaluating merits and by failing to provide reasoned decision. |
| Was the evidence sufficient to show not a public charge, and did the BIA properly assess the I-864 and accompanying documentation? | Abrahamian’s sworn income declaration plus tax documents sufficed for prima facie relief | Docs were insufficient to prove not a public charge | Prima facie sufficiency established; documentation adequate for reopening consideration. |
| Should the court remand to the BIA for proper merits analysis and reasoned decision? | Remand is appropriate for proper adjudication | Not explicitly stated beyond merits dispute | Remand granted for further proceedings. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ahmed v. Mukasey, 548 F.3d 768 (9th Cir. 2008) (DHS opposition may be weighed on the merits, not as a veto)
- Movsisian v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1095 (9th Cir. 2005) (Requires reasoned decisionmaking and independent adjudication by BIA)
- Young Sun Shin v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1019 (9th Cir. 2008) (Prima facie eligibility to justify reopening; not a strict need for full merits)
- Garcia v. Holder, 621 F.3d 906 (9th Cir. 2010) (Clarifies prima facie standard and evidence sufficiency for relief)