Deficient NTA Law Updates
Articles,  Blog

Deficient NTA Law Updates


good afternoon my name is Alena Shautsova I am an immigration attorney from Brooklyn New York
in today’s legally speaking seminar I would like to talk to you about recent
Board of Immigration Appeals decision of Mendoza Hernandez and significance of
that decision basically what happened last year in summer was that the United
States Supreme Court held that when the government sends to you deficient notice to appear and notice to appear is the charging document
that starts your case in immigration court deficient in that it does not
contain date and time when your hearing is going to take place but States TBD to
be determined that is basically a non-void situation and your immigration
proceedings do not start and you know stop time rule for cancellation removal
does not stop running which is very important and we were all very excited
to receive the decision in the summer of last year and based on that decision
many people were able to reopen their cases because now they were able to receive a cancellation of removal relief and some
judges dismissed cases because deficient notices so
everybody was very excited in immigration community but surely but
slowly slowly but surely the other side started to push back arguing that yes
there was a defective notice to appear issued but then we sent or the court
sent a hearing notice stating that you must appear in court on specific date
and time and that we cured that deficiency in the notice and guess what
happened recently is were a number of decisions and the recent one I just
mentioned was only you should have me first 2018 stating that yes
if you received a hearing notice even though the notice to appear itself was
deficient if you received hearing notice that did contain date and time when you
were supposed to come to court that cured the deficiency of the notice to
appear so this is where we stand now I know that many people were able to
reopen their cases based on deficient notice to appear and now with this cases
where we say where the Board of Immigration Appeals states that
deficiency was actually is excusable because it was cured I’m sure that the
government is going to file motions of the motion saying that those people who
are able to reopen the cases did receive a notice like that they would not
qualify any longer for cancellation of removal now you need to keep in mind
though that at times those hearing notices come to a wrong address do not
come to your address at all because there was no address on file and it was
not your fault that you did with no address on file or they come years later
yeah it happens at the times that the hearing notice comes nearly comes years
later because your case was forgotten or the proceedings were terminated or
different situations could have happened so not every case is the same we still
have to order file and see what’s in your specific file but this is an
important decision because it’s basically going to deprive
many people of the relief they hoped for and we need to know about that decision
perhaps perhaps there will be federal court litigation denying this issue in
the future just because the interesting point about all this thing is that when
you first read the US Supreme Court decision it seems that a you will have a
maturity to argue that many people actually will qualify for the relief
and then there’s always always carved out a point and this is gonna be
government Lewis who said no no no wait a second
but leader there wasn’t no dissent and you don’t qualify for the relief that
you thought you would and you can learn more about various situations and
Immigration laws need to know for your case no website
www.shautsova.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *