Ward v. Holder
632 F.3d 395
| 7th Cir. | 2011Background
- Ward and Cainto, Philippines natives, entered the U.S. on K visas in March 2004; Ward on K-1, Cainto on K-2.
- Ward married a U.S. citizen in May 2004; marriage dissolved and no adjustment based on the marriage.
- DHS ordered appearance before an IJ in November 2006 for overstaying visas.
- Ward’s 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(1)(A)(iii) petition for immigrant visa was denied in April 2007.
- December 2008 IJ merits hearing found removability by clear and convincing evidence and ineligibility for cancellation; BIA affirmed on March 31, 2010 via a single-member opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a single-member BIA order under § 1003.1(e)(5) complies with review procedures | Ward argues the order exceeded the BIA’s power by not conforming to a brief order | Holder contends § 1003.1(e) permits single-member decisions and reviewable under the regulations | No violation; single-member order permissible; no prejudice shown; remand not required |
Key Cases Cited
- Martinez-Camargo v. INS, 282 F.3d 487 (7th Cir. 2002) (regulation serves purpose of benefit to alien; prejudice required for invalid action)
- Garcia-Flores, 17 I. & N. Dec. 325 (BIA 1980) (framework designed to insure fair processing may be prejudicial if not followed)
- Gutnik v. Gonzales, 469 F.3d 683 (7th Cir. 2006) (supports that panel referral is not required by § 1003.1(e) in all cases)
- Patel v. Holder, 563 F.3d 565 (7th Cir. 2009) (legal questions include BIA interpretation of statutes and regulations)