Nunc Pro no way

Ramirez-Canales v. Holder, http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/10a0312n-06.pdf (unpublished).

This case was back before the court following a remand to the BIA.  Ramirez-Canales v. Mukasey, 517 F.3d 904, 911 (6th Cir. 2008).  In the prior decision, the court remanded for a determination of whether a noncitizen subject to the permanent bar of INA 212(a)(9)(C)(i)(I) was entitled to 245(i) relief nunc pro tunc.  On remand, the BIA said no and the court deferred to this reasonable interpretation.

The court reviewed the BIA's legal conclusions de novo but deferred to its reasonable interpretations of the INA.  The BIA found that it lacked discretion to grant adjustment nunc pro tunc in this situation.  While the court implied that it would have liked a more thorough review on remand, it accepted the BIA's conclusion as to the limits of its authority.