F OR P UB L I CAT I ON U N I TED STA TES C O U R T O F A PPEA LS F O R T H E N IN T H C IR C U IT Y EW H A LA SH ET A BEBE , P et i t i on er , v. M IC H A E L B . M U K A S E Y , A tt orn ey G e n e r al , R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 05- 76201 A ge nc yN o. A 26- 810- 941 OP I NI ON

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d M a r c h 25, 2008 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia F i l ed B e f o r e : KOZ I NS KI , C h ie f Ju d g e , P RE GE RS ON , K LEI N FELD , T HO MAS , S I L V E RMAN , G O U LD , T AL L MAN , CL I F T ON , CA L L AH AN , BEA a nd N . R . SM I TH , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C UR I AM : 1. P et i t i on erbecam e al aw ful perm anentre si denti n 1 98 4 and , i n 1 99 2, pl ed g u i l tyt o l e wda n dl a s c i v i o u s c o n du c tup o n ac h i l d . C a l . P e n a lC o d e § 2 8 8 ( a ) . I NS c om m e nc e d r e m ova l pr oc e e di ngs on the gr ound tha the w a s de port abl e a s ha vi ng 

# FI LED JAN 05 2 009 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSpage 2

E ve n though s e c t i on 212( c ) w a s r e pe a l e d bythe I l l e ga l I m m i gr a t i on 1 R e f orm a nd I m m i gr a ntR e s pons i bi l i tyA c tof 1996 ( I I R I R A ) , P ub. L . 104- 208, the S up re m e C ou rthel d thatthi s r epea l can’ tbe appl i ed re troac t i vel y t o al i ens, such as pe t i t i one r , w ho pl e d gui l tyt o de port abl e c r i m e s be f or e I I R I R A t ook e f

f e c t . I N S v. S t. C y r , 5 3 3 U .S . 2 8 9 , 3 2 6 ( 2 0 0 1 ) . co m m i tt edan “ ag g rav at edfel o n y, ” 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 2 7 (a)(2 )(A )(i i i )— “ sex u al ab u se o f am in o r,” id . § 1 1 0 1 (a )( 4 3 )( A ). T h e I m m ig ra ti o n Ju d g e ( IJ ) d en iedp etit io n er ’s a s y l um , w i thhol di ng of

r e m ova l a nd C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e c l a i m s , a nd foun d p et i t i on eri nel i gi bl e f or a di sc re t i on ary w ai ver of deport at i on un der f orm er Im m i grat i on and N at i on al i ty A ct§ 2 12 (c ), 8 U . S . C . § 1 18 2(c) (r epea l ed 19 96 ). 1 O n ap p ea l t o th e B o ar do f I m m ig ra ti o n A p p ea ls (B IA ), p etit io n erar g u ed th at h e’s e l i gi bl e f ors e c t i on 212( c ) r e l i e f

. T he B I A a f

f i rm e d, a nd A be be pe t i t i ons f or r e v i e w. 2. P et i t i on erar gu es that , by fi nd i ng hi m i nel i gi bl e f or se ct i on 21 2(c) re l i ef

, the B I A de ni e d hi m e qua l pr ot e c t i on. R e l y i ng on K om a r e nko v. I N S , 35 F . 3d 432, 434–35 ( 9th C i r . 1994) , the thr e e - j udge pa ne l he l d tha tpe t i t i one ri s n’ te l i gi bl e f or se ct i on 21 2(c) re l i ef

. A bebe v. G on za l es , 49 3 F . 3d 10 92 , 11 04 –0 5 (9th C i r. 20 07 ), v a c a te d , 5 1 4 F .3 d9 0 9 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) . U n d e rK o m a r e n k o , 3 5 F .3 da t 4 3 4

– 3 5 , a de port abl e a l i e n c a n be e l i gi bl e f ors e c t i on 212( c ) r e l i e f

onl yi f hi s gr ounds f

orpage 3

Inadm i ss i bi l i ty ( or “ excl usi on ” und erpre- II R IR A l aw ) app l i es t o an al i en 2 ou t si de the U ni t ed S t at es w ho i s notal l ow ed t o ent er , 8 U . S . C . § 1 18 2(a) , w here as de port a t i on appl i e s t o a n a l i e n w ho i s a l r e a dyi n the U ni t e d S t at e s a nd i s e j e c t e d, i d. § 1 22 7. S ee G uzm an-A nd ra de v. G on za l es , 40 7 F . 3d 10 73 , 10 76 (9th C i r. 2005) . U nde rI I R I R A , both i na dm i s s i bl e a nd de port abl e a l i e ns go thr ough the s a m e pr oc e s s , c a l l e d “ r e m ova l pr oc e e di ngs . ” I d. ( c i t i ng R om e r o- T orr e s v. A s h c r o f t, 3 2 7 F .3 d8 8 7 , 8 8 9 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) ) . I I R I R A c ha nge s s om e w ha tthe nom e nc l a tur e appl i c abl e t o i m m i gr a t i on 3 c a s e s . W ha tus e d t o be “ e xc l udabi l i ty ” i s now “ i na dm i s s i bi l i ty ” ; w ha tus e d t o be ( c o n tin u e d ...) depo rt at i on ar e s ub st ant i al l y i dent i ca l t o a grou nd for i nadm i ss i bi l i ty. H er e, 2 p e t i t i o n e ri s d e p o rt ab l e f o rc o mmi tt i n g a n “ a g g r a v a t e df e l o n y , ” 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 2 7 (a)(2 )(A )(i i i ), w h i ch th e p an el h el di sn ’ tsu b st an t i al l y i d en t i cal t o th e m o st anal og ou s groun d for i nadm i ss i bi l i ty— com m i tt i ng a “ cr i m e i nv ol vi ng m oral turpi tud e, ” i d. § 1 18 2(a) (2)( A )( i )( I) . A bebe, 49 3 F . 3d at11 04 –0 5. P et i t i on er c l a i m s tha tthe r a t i ona l e of K om a r e nko c a n’ tbe s qua r e d w i th tha tof T api a - A c una v . I N S , 6 4 0 F .2 d2 2 3 , 2 2 5 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 8 1 ) . H e th e r e f o r e a s k s u s to o v e rru le K om ar enko , and h ol d thata deport abl e a l i en can o nl y be e l i gi bl e f or se ct i on 21 2(c) re l i ef i f hi s c on vi ct i on i s s ub st ant i al l y i dent i ca l t o a grou nd for i nadm i ss i bi l i ty. S ee A bebe, 49 3 F . 3d at11 06 (B er zon, J. , concurri ng ). U nd eri t s pl ai n l angu age, se ct i on 21 2(c) gi ves the A tt orney G ener al di s c r e t i on t o gr a ntl a w f

ul pe rm a ne ntr e s i de nt s r e l i e f onl yf r om i nadm i ss i bi l i ty — no tdepo rt at i on . S ee 8 U . S . C . § 1 18 2(c) (r epea l ed 19 96 ). T api a- 3page 4

( . . . c ont i nue d) 3 “ d ep o rt at i o n ” i s n o w “ rem o v al . ” W e u se th ese t erm s i n t erch an g eab l y. A c una , though, f

ol l ow e d F r a nc i s v. I N S , 532 F . 2d 268, 273 ( 2d C i r . 1976) , a nd he l d tha te qua l pr ot e c t i on r e qui r e d us t o e xt e nd s e c t i on 212( c ) r e l i e f t o a l i e ns fa ci ng depo rt at i on — i f s uch al i ens w ou l d h ave been el i gi bl e f or se ct i on 21 2(c) r e lie f f r o m in a d m is s ib ility , h a dth e yle f t th e U n ite dS ta te s a n da tte m p te dto r e e n te r . T api a- A cuna, 64 0 F . 2d at22 5. In fol l ow i ng F ranci s, T api a- A cuna rea soned that the r e i s no r a t i ona l ba s i s f orgr a nt i ng a ddi t i ona l i m m i gr a t i on r e l i e f t o a l i e ns w ho t e m por a r i l yl e a ve the U ni t e d S t a t e s a nd tryt o r e e nt e r( i . e . , a l i e ns f a c i ng i na dm i s s i bi l i ty ) , a nd nott o a l i e ns w ho r e m a i n i n the U ni t e d S t a t e s ( i . e . , a l i e ns f a c i ng de port a t i on) . T api a - A c una , 640 F . 2d a t225. A c c or di ng t o F r a nc i s a nd T api a - A c una , i ti s w hol l yi rr a t i ona l f orC ongr e s s t o gi ve a nya dva nt a ge t o a l i e ns ou t si de the U ni t ed S t at es thati tdeni es t o si m i l ar l y s i tuat ed al i ens w i thi n the U ni t ed S t at es. W e a r e notc onvi nc e d tha tF r a nc i s a nd T api a - A c unaa c c or de d s uf f i c i e nt d e f e r e n c e to th is c o m p le x le g is la tiv e s c h e m e , a n dth e r e f o r e r e c o n s id e rth is q u e s tio n , a s w e a r e au th o r iz e dto d o e n b a n c . W e n o te a t th e o u ts e t th a t th e s ta tu te doe s n’ tdi s c r i m i na t e a ga i ns tadi s c r e t e a nd i ns ul a rm i nor i tyortr e nc h on a ny fund am ent alri gh t s, and there fore w e app l y ast andard of bare r at i on al i ty. U ni t edpage 5

I n m a ki ng thi s de t e rm i na t i on, w e do notl ook t o the a c tua l r a t i ona l e f orthe 4 l e gi s l a t i on, a s i ti s of

t e n ve rydi f

f i c ul tori m pos s i bl e t o de t e rm i ne w ha tac ol l e c t i ve body , s uc h a s C ongr e s s , ha s i n m i nd. T he t a s k w oul d be pa rt i c ul a r l ydi f f i c ul ti n a ca se l i ke ou rs w here the st atut ory s chem e now i n force i s the prod uctof re peat ed la y e r s o f c o n g r e s s io n a l e n a c tm e n ts a n dju d ic ia l in te rp r e ta tio n s , s o it is q u ite lik e ly thatno on e ant i cipat ed the exi st i ng B yz ant i ne structure. O ur i nq ui rythere fore f oc us e s on w he the rahypothe t i c a l l yr a t i ona l C ongr e s s c oul d ha ve a dopt e d the st atut ory s chem e, no ton w hether C on gres s a ctual l y a do pt ed the st atut e w i th that pa rt i c ul a rr e a s on i n m i nd. S t a t e s v. B a r a

j a s - G ui l l e n, 632 F . 2d 749, 752 ( 9th C i r . 1980) ( quot i ng A l va r e z v. D i st . D i r. of the U . S . IN S , 53 9 F . 2d 12 20 , 12 24 (9th C i r. 19 76 )) . C on gres s has p a rtic u la r lyb r o a da n ds w e e p in g p o w e r s w h e n it c o m e s to im m ig r a tio n , a n dis th e r e f o r e e n title dto a n a d d itio n a l m e a s u r e o f d e f e r e n c e w h e n it le g is la te s a s to a d m is s io n , e x c lu s io n , r e m o v a l, n a tu r a liz a tio n o ro th e rm a tte r s p e rta in in g to a lie n s . S e e K l e i ndi e ns tv. M a nde l , 408 U . S . 753, 769–70 ( 1972) ; B out i l i e rv. I N S , 387 U . S . 118, 123–24 ( 1967) ; F l e m m i ng v. N e s t or , 363 U . S . 603, 616 ( 1960) . O ur ta s k , th e r e f

o r e , is to d e te rm in e , n o t w h e th e rth e s ta tu to rys c h e m e m a k e s s e n s e to u s , b u t w h e th e rw e c a n c o n c e iv e o f ar a tio n a l r e a s o n C o n g r e s s m a yh a v e h a din a d o p tin g it. 4 W e c a n: C ongr e s s c oul d ha ve l i m i t e d s e c t i on 212( c ) r e l i e f t o a l i e ns s e e ki ng to e n te rth e c o u n tryf

r o m ab r o a din o r d e rto “c r e a te [ ] an in c e n tiv e f o rd e p o rtab le a l i e ns t o l e a ve the c ountry . ” R e que na - R odr i gue z v. P a s qua r e l l , 190 F . 3d 299, 309 (5th C i r. 19 99 ) ( qu ot i ng L aG uerr e v. R eno, 16 4 F . 3d 10 35 , 10 41 (7th C i r. 19 98 )) ;page 6

s e e D e S ous av. R e no, 190 F . 3d 175, 185 ( 3d C i r . 1999) . A de port abl e a l i e n w ho w i sh es t o o b t ai n sect i o n 2 1 2 (c) reli ef w i l l k n o w th ath e can ’ to b t ai n su ch rel i ef so l on g as he r em ai ns i n the U ni t ed S t at es ; i f he depart s the U ni t ed S t at es , ho w ever , he c oul d be c om e e l i gi bl e f ors uc h r e l i e f

. B ye nc our a gi ng s uc h s e l f - de port a t i on, the gove rnm e ntc oul d s a ve r e s our c e s i tw oul d othe rw i s e de vot e t o a rr e s t i ng a nd d e p o rtin g th e s e a lie n s . S e e Ju r a d o - G u tie rr e z v . G r e e n e , 1 9 0 F .3 d1 1 3 5 , 1 1 5 3 ( 1 0 th C i r . 1999) , abr oga t e d i n pa rtbyI N S v. S t . C y r , 533 U . S . 289, 326 ( 2001) . S a vi ng scarce reso u rces th atw o u l do th erw i se b e p ai dfo r b y t ax p ayers i s cert ai n l y a l egi t i m at e c on gres si on alobj ec t i ve. O u rd is s e n tin g c o lle a g u e s a r g u e th a t th e r e a s o n w e a ttr ib u te to C o n g r e s s is n o t s o r a tio n a l a f

te ra ll b e c au s e a lie n s w h o a r e “e x c lu d ab le y e t p o te n tia llye lig ib le f oras e c t i on 212( c ) w a i ve r. . . [ a r e ] ge ne r a l l ya l l ow e d t o e nt e ra nd t o appl yf or w a iv e rf r o m w ith in th e c o u n try ,” a n ds o th e g o v e rn m e n t w ill w in dup h a v in g to de portthos e a l i e ns a ny w a y , i f the ya r e de ni e d 212( c ) r e l i e f . D i s s e nta t6. B utthe f a c ttha tthe gove rnm e ntm a yc hoos e , a s am att e rof gr a c e , t o a dm i ta l i e ns w ho s e e m ve ryl i ke l yt o be gr a nt e d 212( c ) r e l i e f doe s notm e a n tha ti tw on’ te xc l ude th o s e it b e lie v e s a r e le s s lik e lyto o b ta in s u c h r e lie f . T h e r a tio n a lityo f

th e s ta tu tepage 7

T he di s s e nta l s o c l a i m s tha tthi s w i l l s om e how “ i nc r e a s e the num be rof 5 r e m ova l pr oc e e di ngs , w hi c h w oul d, i n turn, s pe nd m o re g o v e rn m e n t r e s o u r c e s ,” di ss entat6, bu ti tdo es n’ texpl ai n h ow or w hy thi s w ou l d b e the ca se . l i es i n g i v i n g th atd i scret i o n , o n a case b y case b asi s, t o an ag en cy th atcan assess th e lik e lih o o do f

th e a lie n ’s s u c c e s s a n dth e c o s t o f h is r e m o v a l. 5 T h e d is s e n t m a k e s as im ila re rr o rw h e n it a r g u e s th a t it is in c o n s is te n t w ith the s t a tut orys c he m e t o a s s um e “ tha tar a t i ona l C ongr e s s w oul d w a ntthe s e pe r s ons t o l e a v e th e c o u n try . ” Di s s e n ta t6 . T h e s up p o s e di rr a t i o n a l i tyh e r e , a s we un ders t and i t , w ou l d b e i n h avi ng peop l e l eave the coun tryon l y t o b e r e- adm i tt ed af t erthey are grant ed re l i ef . T he di ss entov er l oo ks the fa ctthatno tal l tho se w ho appl y f or re l i ef ul t i m at el y r ec ei ve i t ; m any, perhaps m ost , w i l l no t . A nd as t o tho se , i tm akes p e r f e c t s e n s e to w a n t th e m to b e o u ts id e o u rb o r d e r s w h e n th e yg e t th e b a dn e w s . A ttha tpoi nt , the yc a nnotr e l yon i ne rt i at o r e m a i n i n the c ountryde s pi t e the a d v e r s e d e c is io n , a n df

o r c e th e g o v e rn m e n t to c h a s e th e m d o w n a n dp a yf o rth e ir de port a t i on. A s Judge P os ne rnot e d i n L a G ue rr e v. R e no, 164 F . 3d 1035, 1041 (7th C i r. 19 98 ), “ [t ] o i nd uce thei r vol un t ary departure, a l i tt l e c arroti s dangl ed b e f o r e th e m , c o n s is tin g o f

th e o p p o rtu n ityto s e e kaw a iv e rs h o u ldth e ys e e kto re turn t o the coun tryand b y doi ng so tri gg erexcl usi on proceedi ng s. ” T o w hat ex ten t th is w il l actu ally sa v e th e g o v ern m en t res o u rc es is so m eth in g w e w o n ’tpage 8

T he di s s e nt ’ s c i t a t i on t o S t a nt on v. S t a nt on, 421 U . S . 7, 14 ( 1975) , di s s e nt 6 a t5, i s m i s pl a c e d. T hi s c a s e i nvol ve d s e x di s c r i m i na t i on, a nd di s t i nc t i ons ba s e d on s e x h a v e b e e n s u b

je c te dto f

a rm o r e s e a r c h in g s c ru tin yf o rth e la s t 4 d e c a d e s o rs o . S ee al so R ee d v . R ee d, 40 4 U . S . 71 (197 1). H er e w e are no tdeal i ng w i th sex di sc ri m i nat i on , or di sc ri m i nat i on base d o n any other s uspectca t egory. A nd w e’ re d e a l i n g w i th a n a r e aw h e r e f e d e r a l p o w e ri s a ti t s z e n i th ; i n d e e d , th e Sup r e me C o u rt h a s in s tru c te du s th a t w e m u s t e x e r c is e “s p e c ia l ju d ic ia l d e f e r e n c e to c o n g r e s s i o n a l p o l i c yc h o i c e s i n th e i mmi g r a t i o n c o n t e x t . ” Fi a l l o v . Be l l , 4 3 0 U . S. 7 8 7 , 7 9 3 ( 1 9 7 7 ) ( f

o o tn o t e o m i tt e d ) . I two u l dth u s b e ar a r e c a s e , i n d e e d , wh e r e we c oul d f i nd i rr a t i ona l i tyi n ac ongr e s s i ona l de c i s i on t o di s t i ngui s h a m ong c l a s s e s of al i ens ( other than al on g suspectl i nes) . kn ow un t i l w e tryi t , bu ti ti s har dl y i rr at i on alt o p re sum e thata s i gn i fi cantnu m ber o f al i en s m ay d eci d e t o d ep arti n o rd er t o g eta sh o tat2 1 2 (c) reli ef. C o n g ress c e rt a i nl yi s e nt i t l e d t o e xpe r i m e nt , w i thouti nt e r f e r e nc e f r om the j udi c i a ry . F or 6 m uch the sam e r ea son, the di ss enti s m i st aken i n argui ng thatw e’ ve un derm i ned the va l i di tyof

8 C . F . R . § 1212. 3( f

) ( 5) unde rthe r a t i ona l e of IN S v. S t . C y r , 533 U . S . 289 ( 2001) . D i s s e nta t7- 8. T he I N S m a yc e rt a i nl yc hoos e t o tr e a tdi f f e r e nt cl asses o f al i en s th e sam e, ev en th o u g h th e st atu t e d o es n o t , an dn o th i n g i n S t . C yr p r e v e n ts it f

r o m d o in g s o . O f

c o u r s e , o u rru lin g m ig h t c au s e th e g o v e rn m e n t to r e c ons i de rthe r e gul a t i on, a nd e ve ntua l l yr e pe a l i ta s no l onge rne c e s s a ry . B ut tha t ’ s up t o the gove rnm e nt ; nothi ng w e s a yt oda yc a s t s a nydoubton the r e gul a t i on. W e thus ove rrul e T api a - A c una ’ s hol di ng tha tthe r e ’ s no r a t i ona l ba s i s f or prov i di ng se ct i on 21 2(c) re l i ef fr om i nadm i ss ibi l i ty, bu tno tdepo rt at i on . T he B IApage 9

th e r e f o r e d id n ’t v io la te p e titio n e r ’s r ig h t to e q u a l p r o te c tio n b yf in d in g h im i ne l i gi bl e f

ors e c t i on 212( c ) r e l i e f

f r om de port a t i on. S i nc e pe t i t i one rw a s not e l i gi bl e f ors e c t i on 212( c ) r e l i e f

i n the f i r s tpl a c e , the B I A c oul d notha ve c om m i tt e d a n e qua l pr ot e c t i on vi ol a t i on byde ny i ng hi m s uc h r e l i e f . W e a f f i rm the B I A ’ s s e c t i on 212( c ) rul i ng, a nd ha ve no r e a s on t o r e c ons i de rK om a r e nko. I nde e d, un der our rul i ng t od ay , K om ar enko becom es a dea d l ett er , as i t s onl y purpo se w as to f ill ag ap c r e a te db yT ap ia - A c u n a . 3. P e t i t i one ra l s o a r gue s tha tthe I Je rr e d byde ny i ng hi s c l a i m f or w ith h o ld in g o f

r e m o v a l. B u t p e titio n e rd id n ’t r a is e aw ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l c la im in h is b r ie f

b e f o r e th e B I A , a n dth e B I A w a s th e r e f o r e n o t r e q u ir e dto c o n s id e rit. S e e , e . g. , B ow e r s v. N a t ’ l C ol l e gi a t e A thl e t i c A s s ’ n, 475 F . 3d 524, 535 n. 11 ( 3d C ir. 2 0 0 7 ) ( issu es ra isedin th e n o ti ce o f ap p ea l b u t n o t arg u ed in ap p ellan t’ s pri nci pal bri ef

ar e dee m ed abando ned). W hen a pet i t i on erfi l es no bri ef and rel i es e nt i r e l yon the not i c e of appe a l t o m a ke a n i m m i gr a t i on a r gum e nt , a s he m a ydo before the B IA , se e 8 C . F . R . § 1 00 3. 38 (f ), then the no t i ce of appeal se rves i n l i eu of abr i e f , a nd he w i l l be de e m e d t o ha ve e xhaus t e d a l l i s s ue s r a i s e d the r e i n. B ut w hen a pet i t i on erdo es fi l e abri ef , the B IA i s e nt i t l ed t o l oo k t o the bri ef for an expl i ca t i on of the i ss ues thatpet i t i on eri s pre se nt i ng t o h ave r evi ew ed. P et i t i on erpa ge 10

F o r th e r ea so n s g iv en in th e th re e- ju d g e p an el o p in io n , th e B IA d idn ’t 7 e rr o n e o u s l yo ri n c o n s i s t e n t l yap p l y8 U . S. C. § 1 1 8 2 ( c ) ( r e p e a l e d1 9 9 6 ) , o r8 C. F. R. § 1213( f ) . A be be , 493 F . 3d a t1101–04. L i ke w i s e , w e r e j e c tpe t i t i one r ’ s due pr oc e s s r e tr oa c t i vi tyar gum e nt . I d. a t1105. w i l l there fore be deem ed t o h ave e xh aust ed on l y tho se i ss ues he r ai se d and ar gu ed i n hi s br i e f

be f or e the B I A . H e r e , pe t i t i one rdi d f i l e abr i e f

, w hi c h di d notr a i s e the w i thh ol di ng of re m ov ali ss ue. H e there fore di dn ’ texhaustthatcl ai m , and w e l ac k j ur i s di c t i on t o r e vi e w i t . B a rr on v. A s hc r of t , 358 F . 3d 674, 677 ( 9th C i r . 2004) ( c itin g 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 ( d ) ( 1 ) ) . T o th e e x te n t L a d h av . I N S , 2 1 5 F .3 d8 8 9 , 9 0 3 ( 9 th C i r . 2000) , i s t o the c ontr a ry , i ti s ove rrul e d. PETI TI O N D EN I ED I N PA R T a nd D I SM I SSED I N PA R T. 7pa ge 11 C ou n se l R obe rtB . J obe a nd F a tm aM a r ouf , L a w O f f i c e of R obe rtB . J obe , S a n F r a nc i s c o, C al i forni a, for pet i t i on er . T ho m as H . D up re e, Jr . , D eputy A ss i st antA tt orney G ener al ; P et erD . K ei sl er , A ss i st antA tt orney G ener al ; M . Joce l yn L op ez W ri gh t , A ss i st antD i re ct or, O ff i ce of I m m i gr a t i on L i t i ga t i on; S ong E . P a rk, O f f i c e of I m m i gr a t i on L i t i ga t i on, W a s h in g to n , D C , f

o rr e s p o n d e n t.