My husband is scheduled for I 485 interview in few weeks. After review of the case our attorney brought the point that his previous removal proceeding was administratively closed instead of being terminated. The attorney want to file a motion to request an IJ to terminate the proceeding.
I am just trying to get a second opinion with this matter.
What would you suggest we do?
Thanks.
If it appears that the IJ can easily dump a case on USCIS for it to approve and not have to bother with you anymore, (s)he is likely to do it.
Admin closure is temporary to give the respondent an opportunity to pursue something with USCIS. If an IJ needs you to get a waiver approved by USCIS in order to allow him/her to finalize a case that only (s)he can grant, then your attorney would get the IJ and or ICE Counsel to re-calendar for a final hearing. On the other hand, if the whole final decision can be processed by USCIS, then termination is the right move. Your attorney should know which is required. That's what you are paying for...being told which is the correct move to make and at the right time. Make sure your lawyer is abiding by this BIA Precedent case from January 31, 2012.
Matter of AVETISYAN, 25 I&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2012) http://www.justice.gov/eoir/vll/intdec/vol25/3740.pdf
(1) Pursuant to the authority delegated by the Attorney General and the responsibility to exercise that authority with independent judgment and discretion, the Immigration Judges and the Board may administratively close removal proceedings, even if a party opposes, if it is otherwise appropriate under the circumstances.
Matter of Gutierrez, 21 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 1996),
overruled.
(2) In determining whether administrative closure of proceedings is appropriate, an Immigration Judge or the Board should weigh all relevant factors, including but not limited to:
(1) the reason administrative closure is sought;
(2) the basis for any opposition to administrative closure;
(3) the likelihood the respondent will succeed on any petition, application, or other action he or she is pursuing outside of removal proceedings;
(4) the anticipated duration of the closure;
(5) the responsibility of either party, if any, in contributing to any current or anticipated delay; and
(6) the ultimate outcome of removal proceedings (for example, termination of the proceedings or entry of a removal order) when the case is recalendared before the Immigration Judge or the appeal is reinstated before the Board.
