2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 7-12-2005 

# Li v . Atty Ge n U SA P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-2407

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " L i v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 869. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/869NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 04- 2407 S H U Y IN G L I,

Pet i t i oner v. *AL BE RT O R. G O N ZA LES, A t t orneyG eneral of the U nit ed S t at es, R es pondent (* S u b s titu te d p u rs u a n t to R u le 4 3 (c ), F e d . R . A p p . P .) O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew of a D eci s i on and O r derof the

B o a rd o f Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls ( B I A N o. A 95- 820- 904) Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

M ay24, 2005 B e f o re : S C IR IC A , C hi ef

Judge , A L IT O a n d R E N D E L L , C i r cui tJudges ( Fi l ed: J ul y12, 2005) OPI NI ON O F THE COURT S C IR IC A , C hi ef

Judge . Shu Y i ng L i , a C hi nes e ci t i zen w ho r emai ned i n the U ni t ed St at es bey ond the ex p ir ati o n o f h er tem p o raryv isa, p eti ti o n s fo r rev iew o f a n o rde r gra n ti n g v o lun taryB egi nni ng on M ar ch 1, 2003, I N S became a partof the D epart m entof H om el and 1 Secur i typur s uantt o t he H om eland Secur i t

y Actof 2002 , P u b . L . N o . 1 0 7 -2 9 6 , 1 1 6 S tat. 2 1 3 5 (N o v . 2 5 , 2 0 0 2 ). 2 departur e. T he B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s deni ed herm ot i on t o r emand pendi ng her a p p l i c a t i o n f

o ra d j u s t me n to f

s t a tu s a n d d i s mi s s e d h e ra p p e a l . W e wi l l a f f i r m. I . Backg r ound Pet i t i onerL i ent er ed the U ni t ed St at es byw ayof a vi s i t orvi s a on J anuary23, 2 0 0 0 . S h e w a s a u th o riz e d to re m a in in th e c o u n tryf o r six m o n th s b u t sta y e d f o r n e a rly thr ee y ear s , r es i di ng i n T exas and N ew Y or k unt i l the I m m i gr at i on and N atur al i zat i on S ervi ce app rehend ed h er on D ecem ber 4, 20 02 and i nit i at ed rem ov al proceed i ng s.

1 O n D ece m ber24, 2002, L i appea r ed w i th an att orneybefor e an I m m i gr at i on J udge, w her e s he admi t t ed al l fac tual al l egat i ons and conc eded r emovabi l i ty . L i s t at ed s he w i s hed t o appl yforr el i ef unde rthe C onvent i on A gai ns tT or tur e and, i n the al t ernat i ve, forvol unt arydepartur e. T he I J cont i nued the hea r i ng unt i l February6, 2003, t o perm i tL i t o fi l e herappl i cat i on forr el i ef. A tthe nexthear i ng, L i appea r ed w i th a d if f e re n t atto rn e ya n d w a s g ra n ted a n o th e r c o n tin u a n c e o f tw o w e e k s in o rd e r to su b m it evi dence i n s uppor tof herappl i cat i on. O n February13, 2003, one w eek pr i ort o the r es chedul ed hea r i ng dat e, L i m arr i ed T hom as R hodes , J r . , a U . S. ci t i zen f r om M i nnes ot a. A tthe s ubs equenthear i ng, on February20, L i w as acc om pani ed byan i nt erpr et erbr oughtbyheratt orney . A n offi ci al courti nt erpr et erw as notpr es ent . L i ’ s couns el w i thdr ew herr eques tt o s eek pr ot ect i on3

underthe C onvent i on A gai ns tT or tur e and a nnounced Li ’ s i nt ent i on, due t o herr ece nt m arriage , to ap p lyfo r an im m igran t visa an d ad justm en t of

statu s. T h e IJ d en ied L i’ s r eques tt o cont i nue the pr ocee di ngs pendi ng adj udi cat i on of herappl i cat i on for adj us t m entof s t atus . T he I m m i gr at i on J udge then found Li t o be r emovabl e and gr ant ed v o lu n ta ry d e p a rt u re f

o r a p e ri o d o f

1 2 0 d a y s , a f

te r w h ic h s h e w o u ld b e re m o v e d to C h in a . A l though L i w ai ved herr i ghtt o appea l , s he nonethel es s appea l ed, cont endi ng s he neve r r eques t ed vol unt arydepartur e— a cont ent i on pr edi cat ed upon herar gum entthats he w as n o t pro v ided an interpre ter bythe c o u rtat th e F eb rua ry2 0 h ea ri n g . D esp it e the w aive r, th e B IA e n ter tain e d th e a p p e a l. W hil e t he ap peal w as pend i ng , L i fi l ed a m oti on w i th the B IA t o rem and the case to a llo w L i to p u rs u e a n a p p lic a tio n f o r a d ju s tm e n t o f

s ta tu s b a s e d o n h e r r e c e n t m a rr ia g e . L i s ubm i t t ed af

fi davi t s and otherevi dence al l egi ng the mar r i age w as ent er ed i nt o i n good fai th. T he B I A deni ed herm ot i on on the gr ounds thats he had notes t abl i s hed, w i th cl ear and convi nci ng evi dence , a s tr ong l i kel i hood thatherm arr i age w as bona fi de and thather ap p li ca ti o n o n rem an d w o u ld b e su cc essf u l. In h er p eti ti o n fo r rev iew , L i con tend s the IJ and the B I A abus ed thei rdi s cr et i on i n deny i ng herr eques tfora cont i nuance and her m o tio n to re m a n d . L i als o c o n ten d s a d e n ial o f d u e p ro c e ss a t th e re m o v a l h e a rin g d u e to the a b sen ce o f a co u rt -pro v ided interpre ter.4 I I . Juri s di ct i on and St andard of R evi ew T he B I A had j ur i s di ct i on under8 C . F. R . §§ 1003. 1( b) ( 3) and 1240. 15. W e have j ur i s di ct i on under8 U . S. C . § 1252. O urr evi ew of a due pr oces s cl ai m ar i s i ng fr om re m o v a l p ro c e e d in g s is p le n a ry. A b d u lra h m a n v . A sh c ro ft , 3 3 0 F . 3 d 5 8 7 , 5 9 5 -96 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ); D e L e o n -R e

y n o so v . A sh c ro

ft , 293 F. 3d 633, 635 ( 3d C i r . 2002) . W e r evi ew the B IA ’s d e c is io n u p h o ld in g th e d e n ia l o f a c o n tin u a n c e f

o r a b u s e o f

d is c re tio n . P onceL e iva v . A sh c ro

ft , 3 3 1 F . 3 d 3 6 9 , 3 7 7 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ). L ikew ise, w e re v iew the B IA ’s d e n ia l o f a m o tio n to re m a n d f

o r a b u s e o f

d is c re tio n . Ko ry tn

y u k v . A sh c ro

ft , 396 F. 3d 2 7 2 , 2 8 2 -84 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ); Eze a g w u n a v . A sh c ro ft , 3 2 5 F .3 d 3 9 6 , 4 0 9 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ). II I. A n a ly sis A . D ue P rocess L i cont ends herr i ghtt o due pr oces s w as vi ol at ed bec aus e the courtdi d notpr ovi de an interpre ter at he r rem o v al he aring . L i con tend s tha t bec au se o f th is, sh e w as u n aw are that herat t orneyhad w i thd raw n h er r equ estfor prot ect i on un der the C on ven t i on A gainst T or tur e. B utthe r ecor d s how s thatL i ’ s att orneybr oughtan i nt erpr et ert o the r emoval hear i ng and di d notobj ectt o t he abs ence of a c our t - pr ovi ded i nt erpr et er . Fur therm or e, L i ’ s att orneyconfi r m ed t o t he I J thathe had di s cus s ed the w i thdr aw al of the C onvent i on A gainstT orture cl ai m w i th L i i n h er nat i ve tongu e— and L i do es not di spute that these att orney - cl i entcomm uni cat i ons t ook pl ace . I ti s w el l es t abl i s hed that“cl i ent s m us tbe hel d acc ount abl e forthe ac t s and omi s s i ons of thei ratt orney s . ” P i oneerI nv. Ser v. C o. v.5

B ru n sw ickA ss o c s. L td . P ’sh ip , 5 0 7 U .S . 3 8 0 , 3 9 6 (1 9 9 3 ); s ee al s o M ar cangelo v. B oar dw alk Regency , 4 7 F. 3 d 8 8 , 9 0 ( 3 d Ci r . 1 9 9 5 ) . Her e , i n l i g h to f th e f a c tth a tLi d iscu ssed the to rtu re c lai m w ith h er a tt o rne yin h er n ati v e d ial ec t, an d ap p rov ed co u n sel’s w i thdr aw al of thatcl ai m , the pr ocee di ng w as notr ender ed funda m ent al l yunfai rbythe a b s e n c e o f

a c o u rt -a p p o in te d in te rp re te r. A c c o rd in g ly, w e s e e n o d u e p ro c e s s v io la tio n . See U ni t ed Stat es v. Torr es , 383 F. 3d 92, 103- 04 ( 3d C i r . 2004) ( expl ai ni ng thatdue p roc ess v iolati o n in rem o v al pro ce ed ing req u ir es a sh o w ing o f f u n d am en tal u n fa irn ess). B . C ont i nuance and R emand T h e I mm i g r a t i o n J u d g e h a s wi d e d i s c r e t i o n t o g r a n to rd e n ya c o n t i n u a n c e , a n d we re v ie w th e B IA ’s d e c is io n to u p h o ld th e d e n ia l o f a c o n tin u a n c e f

o r a b u s e o f

d is c re tio n . P once-Lei va , 331 F. 3d at377. L i ar gues a cont i nuance s houl d have be en gr ant ed pendi ng herappl i cat i on foradj us t m entof s t atus . B utan al i en i s notent i t l ed t o a s t ayof r emoval pr ocee di ngs s i m pl ybeca us e of a pendi ng appl i cat i on foradj us t m entof s t atus , unl es s t he a lie n c a n m a k e o u t a p ri m a f a c ie c a s e f

o r a d ju s tm e n t. See 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 5 5 a(e )(2) (20 0 4 ). A n a d ju s tm e n t o f

s ta tu s is a u th o ri z e d if

, in tera lia , “the al i en i s el i gi bl e t o r ece i ve a n im m ig ra n t v is a a n d is a d m is s ib le to th e U n ite d S ta te s f o r p e rm a n e n t r e s id e n c e , a n d . . . an i m m i gr antvi s a i s i m m edi at el yavai l abl e t o hi m atthe t i m e hi s appl i cat i on i s fi l ed. ” 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 5 5 (a) (20 0 4 ). If a m arriage is en tered into w h il e re m o v al pro ce ed ing s are pendi ng, adj us t m entof s t atus i s onl yappr opr i at e i f “the al i en es t abl i s hes bycl earand convi nci ng evi dence . . . thatthe mar r i age w as ent er ed i nt o i n good fai th . . . and w as notF or the p urpose o f pu rs uing adjustm ent of st atus, a m oti on t o rem and i s treat ed as a 2 m o tio n to re o p e n . S e e , e.g ., Ko ry tn y u k v . A sh c ro

ft , 396 F. 3d at282 ( 3d C i r . 2005) (“ [ M ]o tio n s to re m a n d f iled w h ile a n a p p e a l is p e n d in g b e f o re th e B IA a re e ss e n tially m o tio n s to re o p e n d e n o m in a ted d if f e re n tlyb e c a u se n o d e c isio n o n th e d ire c t ap p e a l ex ists to b e re o p en ed . ”). 6 ent er ed i nt o forthe purpos e of pr ocur i ng the al i en’ s admi s s i on as an i m m i gr ant . ” 8 U . S. C . § 1255( e) ( 2004) . Fur therm or e, the B I A has hel d thata mot i on t o r eopen the 2 pr ocee di ng— t o pr ovi de the al i en an opportuni tyt o pur s ue an a ppl i cat i on for a d ju s tm e n t— s h o u ld b e g ra n te d o n ly w h e n , in tera lia , “the mot i on pr es ent s cl earand convi nci ng evi dence i ndi cat i ng a s tr ong l i kel i hood thatthe r es pondent ’ s m arr i age i s bona fi de. ” Mat t erof

V elar de- P achec o , 2 3 I. & N . D e c . 2 5 3 , 2 5 6 (B IA 2 0 0 2 ); see al so B his ki v . A sh c ro ft , 3 7 3 F . 3 d 3 6 3 , 3 7 1 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 4 ). A s noted, t o b e el i gibl e for adjustm ent of st atus, there m ustbe an i m m i grantvis a i m m edi at el yavai l abl e. H er e, ther e w as no vi s a i m m edi at el yavai l abl e, as L i di d nothave an appr oved vi s a pet i t i on. I n addi t i on, L i w as m arr i ed w hi l e the r emoval pr ocee di ng w as pendi ng, and s he pr oduced no e vi dence atherr emoval hear i ng t o s uppor tthe cont ent i on th a t h e r m a rria g e w a s b o n a f id e . G iv e n th is la c k o f

e v id e n c e , the IJ a c ted w ith in h is di s cr et i on i n r efus i ng t o cont i nue pr ocee di ngs i ndefi ni t el y , pendi ng the adj udi cat i on of L i’ s a p p lic a tio n f

o r a d ju s tm e n t o f

s ta tu s . S e e , e.g ., R e

y n o so -L o p ez v . A sh c ro

ft , 369 F. 3d 27 5, 28 4 (3d C i r. 20 04 ) ( no t i ng that “having exp edit i ou s r em ov al proceed i ng s” i s a leg iti m a te g o a l o f

th e IN S ). A c c o rd in g ly , the B IA d id n o t ab u se its d isc re tio n in uphol di ng the I m m i gr at i on J udge’ s deni al of a c ont i nuance .7

T urni ng t o L i ’ s m ot i on forr emand, the B I A found thats he fa i l ed t o pr ovi de cl ear and convi nci ng evi dence of a bona fi de mar r i age. R egul at i ons conce rni ng adj us t m entof s t atus s peci fythe fol l ow i ng as cons t i tut i ng adequa t e evi dence forthi s purpos e: ( A ) D o c u m e n t a t i o n s h o w i n g j o i n to w n e r s h i p o f p r o p e r ty; ( B ) L eas e s how i ng j oi ntt enanc yof a c om m on r es i dence ; (C ) D ocu m entat i on show i ng com m i ng l i ng of f i nan ci al res ou rces ; ( D ) B i r th cert i fi cat es of chi l dr en born t o the appl i cantand hi s orhers pous e; ( E ) A ffi davi t s of thi r d part i es havi ng know l edge of the bona f

i des of the m ar i t al r el at i ons hi p, or (F ) O th e r d o c u m e n tatio n e sta b lish in g th a t th e m a rria g e w a s n o t en ter e d in to i n o rdert o ev ade the i m m i grat i on l aw s of t he U nit ed S t at es. 8 C . F. R . § 1245. 1( c) ( 9) ( v) . L i s ubm i t t ed t o the B oar d br i ef a ffi davi t s fr om herand R h o d e s a ttes tin g to th e ir m a rria g e ; th e m a rria g e lice n se f ro m th e S tate o f

M in n e so ta; a verys hor t , uns w orn s t at ementfr om an ac quai nt ance s t at i ng thathe had obs erved the coupl e t ogetheron a fe w occa s i ons ; and a s m al l num berof pos ed phot os w i th herand R hodes i n w eddi ng att i r e. L i di d notpr oduce a nyaddi t i onal evi dence of the s or tl i s t ed above, and as r es pondentnot es , nothi ng s ubm i t t ed byL i r evea l s how orw hen s he mether h u sb a n d , g iv e n th a t h e liv e d in M in n e so ta w h ile s h e h a d n e v e r re sid e d in M in n e so ta fol l ow i ng herarr i val i n t he U ni t ed St at es . A s s uch, the B I A di d notabus e i t s di s cr et i on w hen i tdet erm i ned thatL i fai l ed t o pr ovi de cl earand convi nci ng evi dence of a bona fi de m a rria g e , d e n ied h e r m o tio n to re m a n d , an d d ism iss e d h e r a p p e a l. I V . C oncl usi on Forthe for egoi ng r eas ons , w e w i l l aff i r m the or derof the B I A , and w e w i l l deny th e p e t i t i o n f

o rr e v i e w.