Remand of removal proceedings was required, where Board failed to provide reasoned decision when affirming IJ’s order finding that alien and her sons were removable despite fact that alien made prima facie showing of eligibility for nonimmigrant U-visa arising out of her assistance to police officials. Record showed that: (1) U-visa application typically takes 52 months to process; (2) alien filed her U-visa application on October 10, 2017; (3) hearing on alien’s asylum application was unexpectedly moved up to October 20, 2017; and (4) alien’s counsel had failed to mention U-visa application at October 20, 2017 hearing. While alien sought remand so that IJ could consider request to continue removal proceedings in light of her eligibility for U-visa status, Board failed to adequately consider said request and failed to apply its own precedent in denying continuance request, where: (1) Sosa, I. & N. Dec. 807, requires, among other things, IJ to consider likelihood of success on alien’s U-visa application; and (2) Attorney General did not dispute that alien was prima facie eligible for U-visa. Moreover, Board provided only cursory, single-sentence disposition of continuance request that failed to address alien’s prima facie eligibility for U-visa.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Immigration