Tweet
9TH CIRCUIT BREATHES LIFE INTO BID TO STAY IN U.S.
Courthouse News Service
Feb 28 2014
By CAMERON LANGFORD
(CN) - The 9th Circuit threw a lifeline to a man facing deportation to
Armenia and ordered U.S. immigration officials to reconsider removing
him now that he's married to a U.S. citizen.
Masis Tadevosyan is a native of Iran and Armenian citizen who came
to the United States in May 2002, but overstayed his visa so an
immigration judge ordered his removal to Armenia.
Tadevosyan appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals and while it
was pending he married U.S. citizen Lyubov Smolyanyuk, who promptly
filed an I-130 visa petition for him.
After the BIA affirmed his removal, Tadevosyan filed a motion to reopen
his removal proceedings, to which he attached his I-130 petition and
two affidavits of support, one from his wife and the other from his
joint sponsor, Norik Abrahamian.
To qualify for U.S. citizenship a visa applicant has to prove they
are not a "public charge."
Therefore, a relative must submit evidence they make enough money to
support the immigrant. If the relative's income is insufficient the
immigrant can submit an affidavit of support from another person who
agrees to assist them.
Because Tadevosyan and his wife had no reported income for 2006 they
turned to Abrahamian to serve as Tadevosyan's joint sponsor.
Abrahamian testified that he made $22,211 in 2006, attached copies
of his federal and state tax returns from that year and swore to his
2006 income under penalty of perjury in an affidavit.
This was not enough to convince the Department of Homeland Security,
however, which opposed Tadevosyan's motion to reopen his case.
The agency argued that Tadevosyan had not submitted evidence to prove
he was not a public charge because Abrahamian had not provided W-2
forms, paycheck stubs or bank statements to confirm the income on
his 2006 tax returns.
The Board of Immigration of Appeals denied Tadevosyan's motion,
writing "the DHS' opposition is sufficient to require a denial of
the respondent's motion."
Tadevosyan then appealed to the 9th Circuit in Pasadena, Calif.
A three-judge panel from the federal appeals court breathed life into
Tadevosyan's quest for U.S. citizenship Wednesday, finding that the
BIA had simply rubber stamped the Department of Homeland Security's
opposition to his case.
"As we read the BIA's decision here, it is one of those in which
the BIA improperly accorded controlling weight to the fact that
DHS opposed the motion, without regard to whether the basis of that
opposition was correct," Judge Marsha Berson wrote for the panel.
The panel focused on Abrahamian's affidavit and found that, contrary
to the government's claims, it was enough to show he had sufficient
income to support Tadevosyan.
"To the extent the government contends that Abrahamian should have
submitted 'letters, paycheck stubs or financial statements' evidencing
his income, such materials may be submitted but are not mandatory,"
Berson noted.
The appellate judges remanded the case to the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/02/28/65741.htm
Courthouse News Service
Feb 28 2014
By CAMERON LANGFORD
(CN) - The 9th Circuit threw a lifeline to a man facing deportation to
Armenia and ordered U.S. immigration officials to reconsider removing
him now that he's married to a U.S. citizen.
Masis Tadevosyan is a native of Iran and Armenian citizen who came
to the United States in May 2002, but overstayed his visa so an
immigration judge ordered his removal to Armenia.
Tadevosyan appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals and while it
was pending he married U.S. citizen Lyubov Smolyanyuk, who promptly
filed an I-130 visa petition for him.
After the BIA affirmed his removal, Tadevosyan filed a motion to reopen
his removal proceedings, to which he attached his I-130 petition and
two affidavits of support, one from his wife and the other from his
joint sponsor, Norik Abrahamian.
To qualify for U.S. citizenship a visa applicant has to prove they
are not a "public charge."
Therefore, a relative must submit evidence they make enough money to
support the immigrant. If the relative's income is insufficient the
immigrant can submit an affidavit of support from another person who
agrees to assist them.
Because Tadevosyan and his wife had no reported income for 2006 they
turned to Abrahamian to serve as Tadevosyan's joint sponsor.
Abrahamian testified that he made $22,211 in 2006, attached copies
of his federal and state tax returns from that year and swore to his
2006 income under penalty of perjury in an affidavit.
This was not enough to convince the Department of Homeland Security,
however, which opposed Tadevosyan's motion to reopen his case.
The agency argued that Tadevosyan had not submitted evidence to prove
he was not a public charge because Abrahamian had not provided W-2
forms, paycheck stubs or bank statements to confirm the income on
his 2006 tax returns.
The Board of Immigration of Appeals denied Tadevosyan's motion,
writing "the DHS' opposition is sufficient to require a denial of
the respondent's motion."
Tadevosyan then appealed to the 9th Circuit in Pasadena, Calif.
A three-judge panel from the federal appeals court breathed life into
Tadevosyan's quest for U.S. citizenship Wednesday, finding that the
BIA had simply rubber stamped the Department of Homeland Security's
opposition to his case.
"As we read the BIA's decision here, it is one of those in which
the BIA improperly accorded controlling weight to the fact that
DHS opposed the motion, without regard to whether the basis of that
opposition was correct," Judge Marsha Berson wrote for the panel.
The panel focused on Abrahamian's affidavit and found that, contrary
to the government's claims, it was enough to show he had sufficient
income to support Tadevosyan.
"To the extent the government contends that Abrahamian should have
submitted 'letters, paycheck stubs or financial statements' evidencing
his income, such materials may be submitted but are not mandatory,"
Berson noted.
The appellate judges remanded the case to the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/02/28/65741.htm