farzad saeed qureshi, a098 144 820 (bia aug. 14, 2013)
TRANSCRIPT
7/27/2019 Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/farzad-saeed-qureshi-a098-144-820-bia-aug-14-2013 1/11
7/27/2019 Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/farzad-saeed-qureshi-a098-144-820-bia-aug-14-2013 2/11
U.S D pa m n of iExecutive O ce r Im at on Rev ew
Dec s o of he Board o mm at o Appea s
Fal s Chu ch, V rg a 2204l
Files: A098 144 820 Kans Ci y MOA098 44 82
In e: FA RZAD A D QURSHIUZMA FAR AD
N R MOVAL PROCE D NG
APPEAL
Da e:
ON BEHAL F O F PON ENT Ryan T Fi zpa ck s ui e
ON B HAL F O D : Jay e a in di
Ac ing Depu y Chief Co seCHARG :
AUG14 20 3
No ice: ec 237(a)( )(C)( ) &N Ac [8 U .C § 1227(a)( )(C)(i)] Nonimmi an vio a e co di ions of s a us (bo h espon en s)
o ged ec 237(a)( )(B) &NAc 8 U C § 1227(a)( )(B)] n he Uni ed a es i vio a ion o aw (bo espon e s)
APP CATION: A s e of s a s
e esponden s na ives nd ci izens of Pakis an appea om an Immi a ion Judge sOc obe 13 20 1 decision denying ei mo io o econside an o e of emova en e ed onA g s 18 20 1 which nd hem emovab e as cha ged and o de ng em emove T eappea w be dismissed
We eview he dings of c inc uding de e mina ions of c e ibi i y made by heImmi a ion Judge unde a c ea y e oneous" s nd d 8 C R § 1003 ( )(3)(i) We eviewa o he iss es nc ding w e he o no he pa ies have me he e evan bu de o p oof aniss es of disc e ion unde a e novo s and d 8 C F R § 1003.( )(3)(ii)
On A g s 18 20 1 e ig a io J dge iss ed o e ndi g he esponden s a h sb and wife e ovab e as cha ge an o Oc obe 13 2011 o e ed the espo den semove s ey a i e o emo a e e b li y a y e ie om e oval t s s eo e e mmi a io J ge denied he espon e s mo io o econside he emovabi iding We conside e mmig a ion ge s seco o e o be e na o de of emova in
t is c e and co side he appeal of he emovabi ity de e ina ion as we as he o he issuesaised by e espon en
e husba who is e ea espo de in this c e e e e he U i e a es as a onim i n an was au ho ize o wo k in his co y u i Novembe 1 200 ( x I;T a
19 23) He a mi s wo king beyo h s pe io (T a 43-4 ) On J ne 9 2004 he ea
m e n1 v _ i & « • ./h 1 U • F t sCite as: Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
7/27/2019 Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/farzad-saeed-qureshi-a098-144-820-bia-aug-14-2013 3/11
A 9 4 2 et a .
respondent led application to adjust his status to law l pe manent resident (Fo -4 5)with United States ustoms and Immi ation En rcement ( US IS") ( otion, Tab E) 1 OnApr 9, 2 5, his app ication was denied, but the lead respondent c aims to have not receivednoti cation o is decision at the time ( otion, Tab H; Tr. at 4 -4 ) This decision was mai edto he a o ey's o ce, but wi t e lead respondent s na e. hen, on August 5, 2 5, the leadrespondent received a notice om US IS conce ing is employment au hori tion hat s ated
A review o your record indicates hat e Application to Register Perm ent Residence or Adjust Sta us ( -4 5) you led wit this o ce has beenapproved . . Please note t at aliens who are la l pe anent residents o heUnited States a e authorized to e gage in employment
otion, Tab I
The statement hat his s a us had been adjusted was in e or alien may adjust his s a us toaw pe ent resident pursu t to he requiremen s o section 245 o the Act, U S. .§ 255. O her than his s atement in dicta, neither he respondent nor he Dep ment o Homel d Security ( DHS") has provided any evidence at such adjus ment occu edA Notice to Appear was then issued on October 5, 2 5 (E h Motion, Tab )
Although the lead respondent w to d on August 5, 2 5, t at he had law l permanent resident s a us, there is no evidence such s atus was ever gr ted to him.He argues that hisactions herea er were in response to t is statement However, we, l ke he mmi a ion udge,are wit out au hority to apply equitable estoppel to e actions o the DHS.See Matter ofHe andez-Puente 2 I&N Dec. 335 (BIA 99 ) Equitab e estoppe is a judicial y deviseddoc ine hat precludes a party to a lawsuit, because o some improper conduct on that party sp , om asse ng a claim or a de ense, reg dless o its subs antive validi y.Phelps v. FederalEmergen Management Agency 7 5 F.2d 3 ( st ir 9 ) Estoppe is an equitable o action,w only equi able rig ts reco ized Kea o v Unite States 53 F 2d 2 9 (5 h ir19 ) By con ast this Board, i conside ng and dete in ng cases be re it, can onlye ercise such discretion and aut ori y con er ed upon t e A o ey General by aw. F.R§ 3 . ( d)(l ). Our ju isdictionis de ned by the regulations, and we have no jur sdiction un essit is atively anted by e regulations. Matter of Hernandez Puente, supra; Matter ofSano 9 I&N Dec 299 (BIA 9 5) Matter of Za dan 9 I&N Dec. 297 (BIA 9 5). We areab e to e ercise equi able es oppe For these same reasons, we are without author to ant the responden s relie based on he speci c na ure o heir si uation ( RespBr at 2)
Given that we e without power to ant the lead respondent the requested re ie throughequitab e estoppel, we agree with he Immigration udge that both respondents e removab e ascharged. T e lead respondent worked wi hout autho ization be ween August 2 5, and Feb2 . e ar ues at he believed he was au o ized to w r , based o e e oneous s atement by US IS, but we obse e t at a Notice to Appear was se ed on im on October , 2 5,indicating he was not in legal s atus ( xhI). In any event, it is clear that he did work wi out authoriza ion and is removable on his basis A so the responden s' argument hat e DHS must
The responden s motion led in Immigration our provided copies o all per inent documents Re erences to the M tion in this decisi are t this submissio )
2Cite as: Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
7/27/2019 Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/farzad-saeed-qureshi-a098-144-820-bia-aug-14-2013 4/11
A098 144 820 et a .
pro eed aga ns the in res ssion pro eedings is w thout er ( Resp. Br. at 7 8). See se ion246 of he A t. 8 S.C. § 1256. Despite he m sstate ent, he ead respondent h not estab ished hat he was ever anted aw pe anent resident sta us or ha here is any sta s tores ind. See se tion 245 of he A t.
In osing whi e he respondents have ra sed a egations of ine e tive assistan e by prev ousatto eys they have not o p ied wi h he re uire en s estab is ed in Matter of Loza a 9 &NDe . 637 (BIA 1988). See Ot z-Puentes v. Ho er 662 F 3d 481 (8 h Cir. 20 1)Habchy vGonza es 471 F.3d 858 (8th Cir. De 20, 2006);Matter of Compean Bang ey &J E-C 25 I&NDe . 1 (A.G 2009) see a so Rajyev v Muksey 536 F 3d 853 (8th Cir. 2008) (re e ing Constit tiona right in re ova pro eedings to e e tive assistan e of ounse under he Fi hAmend ent, b t nding exer ise of Board s dis re ion to reopen proper where responden wasine e tive y se ed by o se ) The respondents have not sub i ed y eviden e of a erting the er o nse s or t eir respe tive dis ip in au hor ties of the a egations See Matter ofLoza a supra
As the responden s have no s atus a owing the o remain ega y in the nited Sta es, heow ng order wi be en ered.
O R e appea is dis issed.
3Cite as: Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
7/27/2019 Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/farzad-saeed-qureshi-a098-144-820-bia-aug-14-2013 5/11
\'
ITED STATES DE RTMENT F USTICEEXECUTIVE FFICE F R I IG TI N REVIEW
ITED ST TES IMMIG T N C URTNSAS CITY MISS URI
Fi : A0 8 4 - 0 ctob 1 011
In th Matte of
FARZAD SAEED QURES I IN REM VA R CEEDINGS
RES NDENT
))))
C ARGES
A ICATI NS: otion to econside motion fo te mination; ands ecia qu st fo disc etiona y ief
N BE A F F RES NDENT: RY N T FITZ ATRICK
N BE A F F D S AYME SA INARDI
DECISI N F T E I IG TI N UDGE
f : d hRe e ence ma to t e August 1 011 w tten
decision issued by this Cou t vious y n u y 14 011 the
es ondents had a ea ed via t e hone at a maste ca enda
hea in with co ns an ais d a estion as to whethe the
cha g s of mo abi ity against the s ondent had evious y
been sustained y a judg in the akda e, ouisiana Cou t That
cou t evious y was assign d to hea St ouis Missou i
7/27/2019 Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/farzad-saeed-qureshi-a098-144-820-bia-aug-14-2013 6/11
Im igration cases and sub equently these matters were
tr n ferred to the j uri diction o the Kansa City Court. The
tapes of the removal hearing conducted May 21, 2007, were
re iewed by the ourt and it was dete mined that allegations 1
th ough 3 in the Notice to A ear, which was marked as Exhibit
1, had been ad itted and allegation 4 and the removal charges
ha been denied. At one oint during the hearing the res ondent
ha admitted th t his work authorization had e ired in Augu t
20 5, and that he did not recei e new authorization until
Fe ruary 2006, l aving a eriod of a roximately ix month in
wh ch he worked without authorization.
On the ba i of this admis ion, the re iding
Im igration Judge in Oakdale found that Section 237(a (1 (C (i
ch rge of re o ability had been ro en by clear and convincingev dence Moreo er, the Immigration udge deter ined that the
re ondent had fallen out o statu on November 1, 2005, and had
re ained in the United State beyond that date. Therefore the
Im igration Judge also further ound that Section 237(a (1 (B )
ch rge of re o ability had been ro en by clear and convincing
e idence as well. See hibit A Fo m I-2 1. The Im igration
u ge de i ated Paki tan as the country o removal. In an
order dated ugust 18, 2011, this Court again found that the
ch rge under 23 (a (1 (C (i and Section 237(a (1 (B ) were
u tained.
oll wing the entry o that o der the re ondent iled
A098-144 820 2 October 13, 2011
7/27/2019 Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/farzad-saeed-qureshi-a098-144-820-bia-aug-14-2013 7/11
7/27/2019 Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/farzad-saeed-qureshi-a098-144-820-bia-aug-14-2013 8/11
wo king wit ission and was l gally e ai ing in t ited
Stat s. He fu t a gues t at b cause of t e i ffectiv
assistanc of t s ond t's fo me counsel i t is matt (a
atto n y w o lat was censo d fo is conduct t es ond t
is a victim of unfo tunat a d d f ctive actio s o is b alf
by is tained cou s l, and t at s ould not be fu t
victi i d in t I mig atio syst as a esult of t at. T e
lett f ce by t s o d nt is at Ex ibit I i isotion to econsid . T is is t l tte dated August 15, 2005,
advising t e s o d nt t at is a licatio a d 485 ad b en
a ov d and t at was aut o i d to e gage i m lo ent.
T Notic to A a o iginally issu d i t is matte is at d
ctob s, 2005, a oxi at ly two mont s afte t e e o ous
l tt a visi g t s ond t t at was i LPR status
T Gov nm nt a gues t at t e s ond nt's motio is
fil d in xc ss of 30 days f om t o de of t e Cou t a d
t fo is untimely Fu t t at t is Cou t as no aut o ity
o j u is iction to sto t e SCIS f om taki g actio s a d
ca ot issue a o d u o ting to do so. I additio , t
Gov nt a gues t at t is Cou t as o osecuto ial
disc tion w atsoeve a d t at t d cisio to oceed o no t
oc d n an Im ig ation matt is on t at is t ely v sted
wit t D a tm nt of Ho lan Secu ity and ot wit t e
Immig atio u g
T Cou t b liev s t at t e otio a s was due
A098 144 820 4 ctobe 13, 2011
7/27/2019 Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/farzad-saeed-qureshi-a098-144-820-bia-aug-14-2013 9/11
w th n 30 day , o ever, I ll con der t anywa n that t
wa f led w th 40 da and not o late a to cau e an
m o ble dela n the court In add t on, t wa rece ved
r or to the ne chedul ng hear ng wh ch a today, n lenty
of t me for t t be con dered
W th r gard to the other a ect of the re ondent
mot on the Court agree that there no ur d ct on to order
d d h !h(e " . hSCIS to o or n t to o omet ng 8 e n t e Imm grat onudge tatutory author ty In add tion the equ tabl
fa h oned rel ef of e to el not ava lable to the Imm grat on
udge or n the mm grat on Court through any of the enabl ng
federal tatute that th Court aware of
Further t al o clear that th Court ha no
author t th r gard to " ro ecutor al d cret on and none ha
been advanced, and no atute c ted or ca e law that would
allow the Court o grant any ty e of ec al d cret onar
rel ef uch a t at ot on to recon der hould be u orted
by ec f c err r of law or fact and at th t me I ee no
error of law. d the fact are e ent all not n d ute at
th t me w th regard to the exh b t and document furn hed by
the re ondent' coun el, n ofar a they et out the letter
and the corre ndence that e t on n th matter from t
ce t on, and rov de a com lete narrat ve and t me l ne of the
event that have occurred
The C urt ha found that the re ondent removable
A098- 44 8 0 ctober 3, 20
7/27/2019 Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/farzad-saeed-qureshi-a098-144-820-bia-aug-14-2013 10/11
u d r th two charg s r viously ntion d h r s ond nt
through couns l do s not int nd to r qu st any r li f fro
r oval but is int nding to a al this d cision and obtain
r li f in th a llat roc ss h r for th following
ord rs will b nt r d at this ti :
RDER
I I HEREBY RDERED that th r s ond nt's otion tor consid r, otion for t r ination and s cial r qu st for
discr tionary r li f is d ni d
I I FUR HER RDERED that both of th r s ond nts in
this att r as na d abov ar to b r ov d fro th Unit d
tat s to akistan ursuant to th charg s contain d in th
Notic to A ar in ach r s ctiv r cord of roc ding
ctob r 13, 2011 . {'
A098-144-820 6 ctob r 13 2011
7/27/2019 Farzad Saeed Qureshi, A098 144 820 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/farzad-saeed-qureshi-a098-144-820-bia-aug-14-2013 11/11
CERT F CATE PAGE
I hereby certify that t e attac ed proceeding before JUDGE
JOHN R. O'MALL Y, in the matter of:
FARZAD SA ED QURES I
A098-144 820
KANSAS C Y MISSOUR
s an accurate verbat transcr pt of the record ng as provided
by the Executi e Off ce for I igrat on Review and that this s
the or ginal transcript thereof for the f e of the Execut ve
Off e for grat on Rev ew
DANA L NTON (Transcr ber)
DEPOS T ON SERVICES, n
NOVEMBER 27 20
Co p etion Date