Home Immigration Blog Matter of L-A-B-R- et al., 27 I&N Dec. 245 (A.G. 2018): When Can Continuance Be Granted to Adjudicate Collateral Matter?

Matter of L-A-B-R- et al., 27 I&N Dec. 245 (A.G. 2018): When Can Continuance Be Granted to Adjudicate Collateral Matter?

Update

The Attorney General decided the case in Matter of L-A-B-R- et al, 27 I&N Dec. 405 (A.G. 2018). To learn about the new rules for continuances for pursuing collateral relief, please see our full article on that decision [see article]. We are preserving this article on the Attorney General’s initial referral for review in the case as it was initially published for reference purposes.

Introduction: Matter of L-A-B-R- et al., 27 I&N Dec. 245 (A.G. 2018)

On March 22, 2018, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions referred multiple decisions of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to himself for review in Matter of L-A-B-R- et al., 27 I&N Dec. 245 (A.G. 2018) [PDF version]. In the decision, the Attorney General requested briefing of issues relating to when there is “good cause” to grant a continuance of proceedings to allow for adjudication of a collateral matter.

In this article, we will briefly explain the questions presented and what it may mean going forward.

Referral

Under 8 C.F.R. 1003.1(h)(1)(i), the Attorney General may direct the Board to refer to him any of its decisions for review. In the instant case, Attorney General Sessions exercised this authority. The Board’s decision(s) in the matter are stayed pending the review of the Attorney General, in accord with Matter of Haddam, A.G. Order No. 2380-2001 (Jan. 19, 2001) [PDF version see 23 I&N Dec. 700, 701-04].

Issue

Under 8 C.F.R. 1003.29 (2017), an Immigration Judge is authorized to “grant a motion for continuance for good cause shown.” In the cases at issue in Matter of L-A-B-R- et al, Attorney General Sessions explained that “Immigration Judges granted continuances to provide time for respondents to seek adjudications of collateral matters from other authorities.”

Accordingly, the Attorney General requested briefs on the following question:

Under what circumstances does ‘good cause’ exist for an Immigration Judge to grant a continuance for a collateral matter to be adjudicated?

Briefing Schedule

The parties must submit briefs not exceeding 15,000 words on or before April 17, 2018;
Interested amici (friends of the court) may submit briefs of up to 9,000 words on or before April 24, 2018; and
The parties may submit rely briefs of up to 6,000 words on or before May 2, 2018.

Conclusion

Matter of L-A-B-R- et al marks the fourth time in the first three months of 2018 that Attorney General Sessions has referred decisions of the BIA to himself for review. It is the third of the four to request briefing on a specific issue for the issuance of a later decision.

The regulations do not specify when a party may show good cause for granting a continuance to allow for a collateral matter to be adjudicated. Thus, Attorney General Sessions requested briefing on what constitutes a showing of a “good cause” for the granting of a continuance to adjudicate a collateral matter. The issue will be worth watching going forward due to its potential procedural effect on immigration proceedings generally.

An individual facing removal proceedings should consult with an experienced immigration attorney for guidance throughout the entire process.

Also you can read

Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533 (BIA 1988): Reasonable Opportunity for Petitioner to Respond to Derogatory Evidence

In Matter of Obaigbena, the BIA held that assertions of counsel are not evidence and that a petitioner must be given reasonable opportunity to respond to notice of intent to deny.

Jennings v. Rodriguez: SCOTUS Analyzes Jurisdictional Bar With Respect to Mandatory Detention During Proceedings

In this article, we examine the analysis in Jennings v. Rodriguez over whether section 242(b)(9) deprives courts of jurisdiction over detention claims in removal proceedings.

Attorney General Sessions Issues DOJ Memo On Improper Guidance Documents

Attorney General Jeff Sessions released a DOJ memo requiring DOJ components to follow APA notice-and-comment when making binding rules

EOIR – Reminder Regarding Fraud and Abuse Prevention Program

The EOIR released a reminder about the Fraud and Abuse Prevention Program. The EOIR’s Fraud and Abuse Prevention Program was created in 2006.

Want to schedule a consultation?

You can schedule a consultation with us on Skype, over the phone, or in person by using our “Online Consultation” form. Our fee is only $260 per up to 45 minutes for all consultations regardless of the topic.

Contact Information

27 Whitehall Street, 5th Fl New York, NY. 10004

Phone: (212) 202-0342

Fax: (212) 964-0440

Attorney Advertising: prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

myattorneyusa.com is owned and operated by The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC (Grinberg & Segal). The content of myattorneyusa.com is copyrighted. Grinberg & Segal is a NYC immigration law firm that consists of highly experienced immigration lawyers licensed to practice state law in New York and New Jersey and U.S. federal law worldwide. Grinberg & Segal’s  New York-based immigration, deportation and removal lawyers represent immigrant clients in all fifty states and before U.S. Consulates anywhere in the world. Grinberg and Segal’s immigration lawyers are highly skilled and experienced in all areas of immigration law and related federal litigation including Writs of Mandamus and Habeas Corpus as well as APA Action in Federal District Courts, Petitions For Review in U.S. Circuit Courts and all administrative appeals Before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) of the Executive Office for Immigration Review; Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as well as before Immigration Courts nationwide.