A daily digest of immigration-related federal court decisions from around the United States.
Immigration Litigation Update
2d Cir. grants PFR of BIA's asylum denial, remands | 2d Cir. grants PFR of BIA's asylum denial, remands |
|
|
| Tuesday, 21 October 2008 | |||||
|
Alibasic v. Mukasey, 2nd Cir. 10/17/08 (Docket No. 06-4046-ag) POOLER, Hall, Gleeson
The 2d Cir. reversed the Board's decision vacating the IJ's asylum grant and remanded to the Board. Petitioner, an Albanian Muslim from Serbia and Montenegro, was granted asylum by IJ Margaret McManus. Citing the 2004 Country Report and an April 2004 article that discussed a rapid deterioration in relations between Serbs and the major ethnic minorities, the IJ found that, despite some improvements, the situation in Serbia and Montenegro could get worse. Therefore, Petitioner, who had experienced problems in the past, had a well-founded fear of persecution. The gvt appealed, and in August 2006 the Board reversed, finding based on the 2004 Country Report that Serbia and Montenegro had undergone "some fundamental changes," including that Milosevic was no longer in power and the county was now policed by a multi-ethnic police force. Therefore, the Board found that the presumption of future persecution had been overcome.
On appeal, the 2d Cir. considered three issues: (1) jurisdiction, (2) the merits of the asylum claim, (3) relief.
(1) The gvt filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that b/c the Board had remanded to IJ to consdier any available relief including voluntary departure, the Board's decision was not a final order. The court rejected this argument: under Lazo v. Gonzales, 462 F.3d 53 (2d Cir. 2006), the statutory requirement of an order of removal is satisfied either when the IJ orders removal or concludes that an alien is removable. The IJ's finding Petitioner removable based on being EWI afforded the court jurisdiction over the instant appeal. Moreover, the 2nd Cir. joined the 4th, 6th, 9th, and 11th Circuits in holding that the Board's order remanding to the IJ for consideration of VD did not render the Board's decision non-final. Therefore, it was proper for Petitioner to file the PFR without waiting for the IJ's decision regarding VD.
(2) The court, citing Niang v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 138 (2d Cir. 2007), found that the Board's determination that changed country conditions warranted a denial of asylum contained insufficient reasoning:
(3) The court thus vacated the Board's decision and remanded for the Board to conduct a properly thorough review of the record evidence. The court further asked that the Board be precise in stating the standards it is employing with respect to the IJ's decision. In addition, the court noted that "history has not stopped in the Balkans" while the asylum application has been pending, as since that time Kosovo has been recognized internationally and Karadzic has been captured. Therefore, the court noted that the filing of a motion to reopen upon remand in order to supplement the record with "sufficiently current evidence" was particularly appropriate in this case.
PFR GRANTED, BIA decision VACATED and REMANDED.
Atty for Petitioner: Michael P. DiRaimondo, DiRaimondo & Masi, LLP, Melville, NY
Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.12 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved. |
|||||
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|







