Opinion ID: 771797
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: 8 C.F.R 208.9(f)

Text: 8 The Kaurs' first contention is that, by failing to refer the complete record of the proceedings before the asylum officer to the IJ, the INS violated 8 C.F.R. 208.9(f). That regulation provides: 9 The asylum application, all supporting information provided by the applicant, any comments submitted by the Department of State or by the Service, and any other information specific to the applicant's case and considered by the asylum officer shall comprise the record. 10 According to the Kaurs, the resource materials fall within the regulation's definition of information . . . considered by the asylum officer because the referral letter stated that if you appeared for your interview, we consulted available resource materials on human rights conditions in your country. 11 The regulation, however, does not describe the record that must be forwarded to the IJ. See 8 C.F.R. 208.9(f). Rather, it describes the materials upon which the asylum officer may base his decision. The regulation that governs what materials must be forwarded to the IJ is 8 C.F.R.S 208.2(b) (1995), which at all relevant times provided: In cases where the adjudication of an application has been referred in accordance with section 208.14 [Approval, denial, or referral of application], that application shall be forwarded with the charging document to the Office of the Immigration Judge by the Asylum Office. (Emphasis added.) Moreover, 8 U.S.C. 1252(b) (1995) states that decisions in deportation cases shall be made only upon a record made in a proceeding before [an immigration judge]. (Emphasis added.) 12 Thus, the only record that must be forwarded to the IJ is the application for asylum. Here, it is undisputed that the asylum officer referred the Kaurs' asylum application to the IJ as required by 8 C.F.R. 208.2(b) (1995). Accordingly, the INS did not violate 8 C.F.R. 208.9(f).