Summary of New York Law Firm Bretz & Coven Gets BIA Reversed for Failing to Consider Hardship to Family
This article summarizes a legal victory for Harold Gonzales in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The court ruled that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) erred by overturning an immigration judge's decision to grant adjustment of status, specifically because the BIA failed to consider the hardship deportation would cause to his family. This ruling reaffirmed that family hardship is a mandatory factor in such cases.
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)
- Immigration Judge
- Adjustment of Status application
- Misdemeanor sexual misconduct conviction
- Inadmissibility waiver based on family hardship
New York, NY (PRWEB) October 04, 2011
New York immigration law firm of Bretz & Coven, LLPs associate attorney Amanda E. Gray won a case in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Gonzales Bordonave v. Holder, Docket Number 10-4906, September 27, 2011 (unpublished).
The Court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) erred when it overturned the immigration judges grant of adjustment of status allowing Harold Gonzales to stay in the United States because it failed to consider hardship to his family if he were deported. The ruling further said that this is a factor that the immigration judge had considered and which the BIA is required to consider in adjustment of status cases.
The petitioner, with one conviction, misdemeanor sexual misconduct for which he was not sentenced to any period of incarceration, was eligible for adjustment under INA
- What was the outcome of Gonzales Bordonave v. Holder?
The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals erred when it overturned the immigration judge's grant of adjustment of status. - Why did the court rule in favor of the petitioner?
The ruling stated the BIA failed to consider the hardship to the petitioner's family if he were deported. - Is family hardship a required factor in adjustment of status cases?
Yes, the ruling confirmed that family hardship is a factor the BIA is required to consider in these cases. - Did the petitioner have a criminal record?
Yes, the petitioner had one conviction for misdemeanor sexual misconduct. - Was the petitioner sentenced to incarceration for his conviction?
No, the petitioner was not sentenced to any period of incarceration for the misdemeanor. - Which law firm represented the petitioner?
The New York immigration law firm Bretz & Coven LLP represented the petitioner through associate attorney Amanda E. Gray. - When was the case decided?
The case was decided on September 27, 2011. - Was the court opinion published?
No, the opinion was unpublished.
