Overview

In Matter of C-A-R-R-, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) issued a significant decision clarifying when an Immigration Judge (IJ) may treat an asylum application as incomplete or abandoned. The decision reaffirms that while IJs have wide authority to set filing deadlines and enforce procedural rules, they cannot deem a Form I-589 abandoned solely because the applicant failed to file a personal declaration.

The case reaffirms Matter of Interiano-Rosa, 25 I&N Dec. 264 (BIA 2010). It provides practical guidance for both immigration practitioners and applicants on the distinction between the required elements of an asylum application and supplemental materials, such as declarations.

Case Background

The respondent, a citizen of El Salvador, filed multiple asylum applications over several years.

  • His first three Form I-589s were incomplete because he left some questions unanswered.
  • The IJ properly declined to consider those on the merits.
  • His fourth application, however, included all necessary answers but was accompanied by an English-language declaration that lacked a proper certificate of translation and did not include the Spanish original.

The IJ ruled that the absence of a compliant declaration rendered the entire application “waived and abandoned.” The BIA disagreed, holding that while IJs can require declarations, the failure to submit one correctly does not invalidate the I-589 itself.

Key Holdings

  1. Incomplete Applications May Be Rejected—But Only for Missing Required Information

The BIA reaffirmed that an IJ may refuse to consider an asylum application on the merits if it is incomplete—meaning it lacks answers to required questions or mandatory elements identified in 8 C.F.R. § 1208.3(c)(3). This authority stems from both the regulations and an IJ’s general case-management powers under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.31(h).

In C-A-R-R-, the first three applications were correctly deemed incomplete because they omitted required responses on the form.

  1. A Declaration Is Not a Constituent Part of Form I-589

The BIA held that the asylum form itself requires specific, responsive answers to every question—but not a separate declaration. Declarations are supporting evidence, not a mandatory component. Therefore, the absence of a declaration cannot make a Form I-589 “incomplete” or justify deeming it abandoned.

“Because declarations are not a constituent part of an asylum application, a Form I-589 is not incomplete, and an Immigration Judge may not deem it abandoned, solely because the respondent did not submit a declaration.” — Matter of C-A-R-R-, 29 I&N Dec. at 17.

  1. Failure to File a Declaration Affects Proof, Not Completeness

The proper consequence for missing a declaration is that the opportunity to file it is waived, and the IJ may consider the absence of such evidence when assessing credibility or meeting the burden of proof—not by dismissing the application altogether.

This maintains fairness while preserving the IJ’s authority to manage filings.

  1. Cancellation of Removal Denied for Lack of Good Moral Character

The respondent also sought cancellation of removal but admitted to selling cocaine in 2023. Under INA §§ 101(f)(3) and 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II), this constitutes an admission to acts relating to a controlled substance and thus bars a finding of good moral character. The BIA affirmed the IJ’s denial of cancellation on that ground.

Practical Takeaways for Practitioners and Applicants

  • Complete every field on the I-589. Even minor omissions can result in an “incomplete” finding.
  • Declarations are advisable but not mandatory. While judges may request them, failure to include one does not render the asylum form invalid.
  • Translation certificates must be properly executed. Declarations in a foreign language must include both the original and a certified translation.
  • Counsel should move timely to cure deficiencies. The BIA reaffirmed that applicants who are given a chance to correct deficiencies and fail to do so risk abandonment findings.
  • Distinguish between procedural completeness and evidentiary sufficiency. Missing documents may weaken the claim but do not automatically nullify the filing.

Significance

Matter of C-A-R-R- reinforces due process protections in asylum proceedings by drawing a clear line between mandatory form requirements and supplemental evidence. It prevents improper dismissals of asylum claims over technical errors in supporting documents, ensuring that cases are decided on their substantive merits rather than procedural missteps. Individuals with case-specific questions should consult with an experienced immigration attorney.

Final Outcome

  • Asylum Application: Appeal sustained; remanded to the IJ for merits adjudication.
  • Cancellation of Removal: Denied for lack of good moral character.