Sanchez v. Holder, http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/10a0367p-06.pdf (published, December 6, 2010).
The noncitizen was personally served with an OSC. He did not receive the hearing notice (it was returned because the time to forward the mail had expired), was ordered deported, and filed a motion to rescind 11 years later.
The motion was denied because there was no proof to support his claim that he was still living at the address when the notice was sent by certified mail. Because the notice was returned as undeliverable with the time to forward mail having expired, and it was sent by certified mail, there was a strong presumption that the proper procedures were followed. Because notice was proper, the motion was untimely. Had notice not been proper, presumably the motion would have been timely because there would have been no filing deadline.
It is not clear what exactly was submitted in support of the claim, but this should be a warning to other noncitizens to submit detailed affidavits and other corroborating evidence.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment