# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 5- 32 81

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Sal va do r Gon zal ez-Ve ga

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Peti ti on er

v.

Lore tt a E. Ly

nc h, At to rn ey

Gene ral of t he Uni te d S ta te s

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Resp on de nt

__ __ __ __ __ __

Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w of a n Ord er o f th e Bo ard of I m

m ig rat io n Ap pe al s

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Sep te m

be r 20 , 20 16 Fil ed : Oct ob er 1 4, 2 01 6

__ __ __ __ __ __
Befo re WOL LMAN, ARNOLD, and KELLY , Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __
ARNOLD, Circu it Ju dg e.

Afte r an im m ig rat io n jud ge de ni ed Sal va do r Gon zal ez-Ve ga 's req u e s t f or ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e of hi s im m ig rat io n pr oc eed in g s , h e a sk ed th e Bo ard of

Im m ig rat io n Ap pe al s t o re vi ew th e IJ 's de ci si on an d a ls o a sk ed th e BIA t o e xe rci se it s own in de pe nd en t au th or it y to gr an t ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e. The BIA up he ld th e IJ 's
de ci si on bu t di d no t ru le on Gon zal ez-Ve ga 's se co nd req ue st , an d he ap pe al ed

. W eaffi rm th e BIA's affi rm an ce o f th e IJ 's d et erm in at io n, bu t we rem an d th e cas e to th e

BIA t o ru le on hi s re qu es t fo r ad m in is tra ti ve clo su re.

Gon zal ez-Ve ga is a Mex i c a n c i t i zen who en te red th e Uni te d St at es in 20 04
wit ho ut au th or iz at i on

. The Dep art m en t of Hom el an d Secu rit y in it ia te d rem ov al

pr oc eed in gs in 20 12
, as se rti ng th at he was rem ov ab le as an al ie n who was pr es en t in
th e co un try wit ho ut be in g ad m it te d or pa ro le d

. Se e 8 U.S.C. § 11 82 (a)( 6) (A)(i ).
Gon zal ez-Ve ga co nc ed ed th at he was re m ov ab le

.

Bei ng in el ig ib le fo r m or e pr os ai c fo rm s of rel ie f fro m rem ov al li ke as y lu m or

can cel la ti on of rem ov al

, Gon zal ez-Ve ga req ue st ed ad m in is tra t i v e cl os ur e fro m th e I J

. Wh e n an IJ or th e BIA gr an ts ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e, th e al ie n's rem ov a l

pr oc eed in gs are te m

po rari ly rem ov ed fro m th e IJ 's cal en da r or fro m th e BIA's do ck et ,

an d no jud gm e n t o n t h e m eri ts is en te red

. Her na nd ez v. Hol de r, 60 6 F.3 d 90 0, 90 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ). The cas e is si m pl y on ho ld

. The IJ an d BIA us e th is p r o c e d ur al

co nv en ie nc e to co nt ro l th e im m ig rat io n do ck et

. Adm in is tra ti ve cl os ur e m ay be

ap pr op ria te , fo r in st an ce, i n a nt ic ip at io n of an ev en t rel ev an t to th e im m ig rat io n
pr oc e e d i n g s th at th e pa rti es can no t co nt ro l an d th at m ay no t oc cu r so on

. In re Avet is ya n , 25 I. & N. Dec. 68 8, 6 92 (BIA 2 01 2)

.

In su pp or t of hi s req ue st , Gon zal ez-Ve ga ex pl ai ne d th at hi s wife ha d g i v en bi rth to hi s so n in th e Uni te d St at es in Ja nu ary, 20 14
, an d th at th is so n co ul d sp on so r

a vi sa pe ti ti on on Gon zal ez-Ve ga 's be ha lf on ce th e so n tu rn ed 21

. He al so m ai nt ai ne d
th at th e so n wou ld su ffer ex tre m e ha rd sh ip w i t h ou t Gon zal ez-Ve ga 's pa te rn al care

an d fin an ci al su pp or t; th at po te nt ia l fu tu re ch an ge s in la w an d ex ecu ti ve po li cy co ul d

m ak e hi s rem ov al a lo wer ad m in is tra ti ve pr io rit y th an th e rem ov al of ot he r al ie ns ; th at
h i s co nt in ue d pr es en ce in th e Uni te d St at es wou ld al lo w hi m to su pp or t two o t h e r

so ns li vi ng in Mex ic o; th at he ha s s t r o n g t i es to th e co m m un it y ; th at Mex ic o is to o da ng ero us to li ve in ; an d th at he ha s an in co ns eq ue nt ia l cri m in al reco rd

. The IJ de ni ed
Gon zal ez-Ve ga 's req ue st fo r ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e, em ph as iz in g th at hi s in fan t so n

-2

-wou ld no t tu rn 21 wit hi n a reas on ab le ti m e, an d th e la ck of a pe nd in g vi sa ap pl ic at io n

m ad e th e an ti ci pa te d d ur at io n o f cl os ur e in de fin it e.

W e fir st co ns id er whe th er we ha ve juri sd ic ti on

. W e he ld in Her na nd ez th at we la ck juri sd ic ti on to rev ie w th e de ni al of a m ot io n fo r ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e be cau se th ere was no m ean in gf

ul st an da rd by whi ch to rev ie w th at de ci si on

. Gon zal ez-Ve ga

m ai nt ai ns th at th e BIA su pp li ed th e m is si ng st an da rd aft e r Her na nd ez whe n it

pr om ul ga te d th e fo ll owi ng no n- ex cl us iv e co n s i d e rat io ns th at an IJ an d th e BIA
sh ou ld co nt em

pl at e whe n co nf

ro nt ed wit h an ad m in is tra ti ve -cl os ur e req ue st : th e

reas on ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e is so ug ht

, th e reas on ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e is op po se d,
th e li ke li ho od th e ot he r a c t i o n be in g pu rs ue d ou ts id e of rem ov al pr oc eed in gs wil l

su ccee d, th e an ti ci pa te d d ur at io n o f th e cl os ur e, th e res po ns ib il it y of e it he r pa rty i n

co nt rib ut in g to an y cu rren t or an ti ci pa te d d e l a y, an d th e ul ti m at e ou tc om e of th e

rem ov al pro ceed in g o nc e it reco m m en ces

. Se e Avet is

ya n , 25 I. & N. Dec. at 6 96

.

The go ve rn m en t arg ue s th a t we reaf fir m ed ou r ho ld in g in Her na nd ez th at
de ni al s of m ot io ns fo r ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e are un rev ie wab le whe n w e d e c i d ed

Dia ll o v. Hol de r , 71 5 F.3 d 71 4, 71 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ) ov er a y ear aft er th e BIA de ci de d
Avet is ya n , m ean in g th at Dia ll o req ui res us to reject Gon zal ez-Ve ga 's arg um en t. Bu t

no th in g in Dia ll o in di cat es th at we c o n s i d ered Avet is ya n's po te nt ia l effe ct on Her na nd ez ; in de ed

, th e co ur t ne ve r ev en m en ti on s Avet is ya n no r di d th e pa rti es rai se th e po in t. "[W] e are ge ne ral ly not bo un d b y a pr io r pa ne l's im

pl ic it res ol ut io n o f an
is su e th at was ne it he r rai se d by th e pa rti es no r di sc us se d by th e pa ne l

. " St re u v. Dor mir e , 55 7 F .3d 96 0, 9 64 (8t h C ir. 2 00 9)

.

W e ag ree wit h Gon zal ez-Ve ga th at th e BIA i n Av e t is ya n su pp li ed a us eab le

st an da rd fo r rev ie win g de ni al s of m ot io ns fo r ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e

. B a l an ci ng

co ns id erat io ns is a co m

m on , wor ka da y jud ic ia l fu nc ti on , eve n i f in a gi ve n cas e th e ba la nc in g can be di ffi cu lt

. W e th eref or e joi n th e o t h e r c i r c ui ts th at ha ve he ld th at
ci rcu it co ur ts ha ve juri sd ic t i on to rev ie w de ni al s of m ot io ns fo r ad m in is tra ti ve

-3

-cl os ur e, as su m in g, of co ur se , th at ot he r jud ic ia l pr ereq ui si te s ( l i k e fin al it y ) are

sa ti sf ie d. Se e Dur uj i v. Lyn ch

, 63 0 F. App 'x 58 9, 59 2 (6 th Ci r. 20 15 ) (u np ub li sh ed );
Sa nt os -Amay a v. Hol de r , 54 4 F. App 'x 20 9, 20 9 (4 th Ci r. 20 13 ) (u np ub li sh ed pe r

cu ria m ).

W e re v ie w th e de ni al of a m ot io n fo r ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e fo r ab us e of
di sc ret io n. Se e S

a n t o s

- Ama ya , 54 4 F. App 'x at 20 9. The BIA ab us es it s di sc ret io n whe n it m ak es a de ci si on "wi th ou t rat io na l ex pl an at io n, de pa rts fro m es ta bl is he d

po li ci es , in vi di ou sl y di sc riminat es ag ai ns t a pa rti cu la r race or gr ou p, or whe re th e
ag en cy fai ls to co ns id er al l fact or s pr es en te d by th e al ie n or di st or ts im po rta nt as pe ct s of th e cl ai m ." Hab c h

y v

. Fil ip
, 55 2 F.3 d 91 1, 91 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ). The BIA m us t

co ns id er th e is su es rai se d an d de ci de in te rm s su ffi ci en t to al lo w us "t o pe rcei ve th at
it ha s he ard an d th ou gh t an d n ot m erel y reac te d." Omon di v. Hol de r , 67 4 F .3d 79 3,
80 0 (8 th Cir . 20 12 ).

Si nc e th e BIA es se nt ia ll y ad op te d th e IJ 's re as on in g o n t hi s p oi nt , we rev ie w th e IJ 's de ci si on

. Se e Gar ci a- Gon za le z v. Hol de r , 73 7 F.3 d 49 8, 50 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ).
W e di sc ern no ab u s e o f d is cret io n he re. The IJ ex pl ai ne d th at th e Avet is ya n

co ns id erat io ns go ve r n a nd pr oc eed ed to ho ld th at th e two -d ecad e cl os ur e pe rio d

w e ig he d he av il y ag ai ns t cl os ur e, an d we ag ree. The po ss ib il it y of a su cces sf u l v i s a
pe ti ti on was to o rem ot e: No ap pl ic at io n was pe nd in g, no r co ul d on e be fo r al m os t 21

y ears . That th e IJ weig he d so m e co ns id erat io ns , l ik e th e an ti ci pa te d du rat io n o f th e cl os ur e, m or e he a v i l y t ha n Gon zal ez-Ve ga wou ld pr efer do es no t m ean th at th e IJ
ab us ed it s d is cret io n. No r do es an IJ h av e to reci te th e co ns id erat io ns m ech an ic al ly
whe n ap pl y in g th em to th e fact s. W e req ui re on ly th at it be cl ear fro m th e reco rd th at

t h e I J h ad th e ap pr op ria te co ns id erat io ns in m in d an d co m m it te d no cl ear erro r o f jud gm en t in weig hi ng th em

. W e are co nv in ced th at th e IJ ha d th e Av et is ya n

c o n si de rat io ns fir m ly in m in d he re an d co m m it te d no cl ear erro r of jud gm en t i n weig hi ng th em : Sh e reci te d each of th em an d refe rred to Avet is ya n sev eral ti m es in
he r an al y si s. W e al so co nc lu d e t h a t th e IJ di d no t ab us e it s di sc ret io n by be in g

-4

-un m ov ed by Gon zal ez-Ve ga 's arg um en ts in fav or of ad m in is tra ti v e c lo su re, so we

affi rm on th is po in t.

Gon zal ez-Ve ga al so arg ue s th at th e BIA ab us ed i t s di sc ret io n by fai li ng to
ad dr es s h is req ue st th at it ex erci se it s i nd ep en de nt au th or it y to gra nt ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e. Alt ho ug h th e BIA ne ed no t writ e an ex eg es is on ev ery co nt en ti on a m ov an t
ad va nc es , it m

us t gi ve an e x p l a n a ti on sp eci fic en ou gh th at we can di sc ern an d

ev al ua te it s reas on in g. Omon di

, 67 4 F.3 d at 80 0. Our read in g of th e BIA's op in io n

rev ea l s t h a t it fo cu se s on ly on th e IJ 's de ci si on : Nowh ere do es th e BIA al lu de to
Gon zal ez-Ve ga 's requ es t th at it ex erci se it s in de pe nd en t aut ho rit y

. The go ve rn m en t

m ai nt ai ns th at th e BIA i mpli ci tl y reject ed th e req ue st fo r ad m in is tra ti ve cl os ur e be cau se it co ns id ered a n a r g um en t ab ou t im m in en t im

m ig rat io n refo rm th at
Go n zal ez-Ve ga di d no t ad va nc e be fo re th e IJ

. Gon zal ez-Ve ga co rrec tl y po in ts ou t,
ho wev er, th at he m ad e th is arg um en t to th e IJ an d th at he br oa ch ed th e su bjec t to th e BIA to su pp or t hi s co nt en ti on th at th e IJ erre d. So it is un cl ear to us whe th er th e BIA
he ard an d th ou gh t abo ut Gon zal ez-Ve ga 's al te rn at iv e req ue st

. W e th eref or e rem an d
th e m at te r to th e BIA to co ns id er whe th er G o n z a le z-Veg a's req ue st "war ran ts a fav or ab le ex erci se of th e BIA's di sc ret io n." Se e Cl if to n v. Hol de r , 59 8 F.3 d 48 6, 49 4 (8 th Cir . 20 10 ).

Affi rm ed in pa rt a nd rem an de d i n p art

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-5

-