U.S.

Department of Justice
Executive Office for Immigration Review
Board ofImmigration Appeals
Office ofthe Clerk
5107 leesburg Pike, Suite 2000
Falls Church, Virginia 22041

DHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - SEA

1000 Second Avenue, Suite 2900
Seattle, WA 98104

Name: GUERRA VILLEDA, LEILI

Riders: 206-310-446

A 206-310-445
Date of this notice: 4/ 29/2016

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case.
Sincerely,

DOWUL

ct1/vu

Donna Carr
Chief Clerk
Enclosure
Panel Members:
O'Leary, Brian M.
Grant, Edward R.
Mann, Ana

Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit

www.irac.net/unpublished/index/
Cite as: Leili Guerra Villeda, A206 310 445 (BIA April 29, 2016)

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

Svendsen, Shara
Law Office of Shara Svendsen
16300 Mill Creek Blvd.
Ste 208
Mill Creek, WA 98012

u.s. Department of Justice

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Executive Office for Immigration Review

, --'

'

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

Date:

Files: A206 310 445 - Seattle, WA

A206 310 446

AP 2 9 2016

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
APPEAL
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS: Shara Svendsen, Esquire
APPLICATION: Reopening
The respondents I appeal from an Immigration Judge's decision dated May 8, 2015,
denying the respondents' March 30, 2015, motion to reopen their February 24, 2015, removal
proceedings, which had been conducted in absentia under section 240(b)(5)(A) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1229a(b)(5)(A). The Department of Homeland
Security (OHS) has filed no response to the appeal. The appeal will be sustained.
We have considered the totality of the circumstances presented in this case, including the
lead respondent's affidavit that she did not receive notice of her hearing, her incentive to appear,
the respondent's attempt to keep the government apprised of her address by filing a change of
address with OHS, her diligence in seeking reopening, and find that the evidence is sufficient to
establish that the respondent did not receive proper notice of the hearing below, and that
reopening and rescission of the in absentia removal order is therefore warranted. Accordingly,
the respondents' appeal will be sustained, the in absentia orders will be rescinded, the
proceedings will be reopened, and the record will be remanded to allow the respondents another
opportunity to appear for their hearing.
Accordingly, the following order will be entered.
ORDER: The appeal is sustained, the in absentia orders are vacated, proceedings are
reopened, and the record is remanded to the Immigration Judge for further proceedings.

Fok'-THEBORD

The lead respondent, A206 310 445, is the mother of the minor respondent, A206 31 O 446.

Cite as: Leili Guerra Villeda, A206 310 445 (BIA April 29, 2016)

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

In re: LEILI GUERRA VILLEDA

ALMA IBETH DOMINGUEZ-GUERRA

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
IMMIGRATION COURT
1000 SECOND AVE., SUITE 2500
SEATTLE, WA 98104

LEAD FILE: 206-310-445

RE: 206-310-445 GUERRA VILLEDA, LEILI
206-310-446 DOMINGUEZ-GUERRA, ALMA IBETH

DATE: May 8, 2015

UNABLE TO FORWARD - NO ADDRESS PROVIDED

ll':)ATTACHED IS A COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE,

THIS DECISION

(IS FINAL UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED WITH THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS

WITHIN 30 CALENDAR DAYS OF THE DATE OF THE MAILING OF THIS WRITTEN DECISION.
SEE THE ENCLOSED FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPERLY PREPARING YOUR APPEAL.
YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL, ATTACHED DOCUMENTS, AND FEE OR FEE WAIVER REQUEST
MUST BE MAILED TO:
BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000
FALLS CHURCH, VA 20530
ATTACHED IS A COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE AS THE RESULT
OF YOUR FAILURE TO APPEAR AT YOUR SCHEDULED DEPORTATION OR REMOVAL HEARING.
THIS DECISION IS FINAL UNLESS A MOTION TO REOPEN IS FILED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH SECTION 242B{c) (3) OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT, 8 U.S.C.
SECTION 1252B(c) (3) IN DEPORTATION PROCEEDINGS OR SECTION 240(c)(6),
8 U.S.C. SECTION 1229a(c} (6) IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS. IF YOU FILE A MOTION
TO REOPEN, YOUR MOTION MUST BE FILED WITH THIS COURT:
IMMIGRATION COURT
1000 SECOND AVE., SUITE 2500
SEATTLE, WA 98104
OTHER:

CC: HANA SATO, ICE ASST. CHIEF COUNSEL

1000 2ND AVENUE, SUITE 2900
SEATTLE, WA, 98104

FF

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

Law Office of Shara Svendsen

Svendsen, Shara
16300 Mill Creek Blvd. Ste 208
Mill Creek, WA 98012

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
IMMIGRATION COURT
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON

File Numbers:
Leili GUERRA VILLEDA (Lead),
Alma Ibeth DOMINGUEZ-GUERRA,
Respondents.

A206-310-445
A206-310-446

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

CHARGE:

INA 212(a)(6)(A)(i)-Alien Present without Admission or

Parole (for both of the respondents)

APPLICATION:

Motion to Reopen In Absentia Orders of Removal

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS
Shara Svendsen, Esquire
Law Office of Shara Svendsen, PLLC
16300 Mill Creek Boulevard, No. 208
Mill Creek, WA 98012

ON BEHALF OF DHS
Hana Sato, Assistant Chief Counsel
Department of Homeland Security - ICE
1000 Second Avenue, Suite 2900
Seattle, WA 98104

DECISION OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE

I. Introduction and Procedural History
The Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") initiated removal proceedings against
the respondents-the lead respondent, Leili Guerra Villeda, and her minor child, Alma Ibeth
Dominguez-Guerra-by filing two Notices to Appear ("NTAs") with the Seattle Immigration
Court on April 1, 2014. Exh. 1. The NTAs allege that the respondents are natives and citizens of
Honduras who entered into the United States at or near Progreso, Texas, on or about November
26, 2013, without being admitted or paroled by an immigration officer. Id. On the basis of these
allegations, the DHS charged the respondents with removability under section 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA" or "Act"), as aliens present in the United States
without admission or parole, or who arrived at a time or place other than as designated by the
Attorney General. Id.
On June 1, 2014, the Court mailed a hearing notice to the respondents at the address
provided by the lead respondent, ordering them to appear at their initial master calendar hearing

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

In the Matters of:

II. Motion to Reopen

An in absentia removal order may be rescinded at any time if the alien demonstrates that
she did not receive notice. INA240(b)(S)(C); 8 C.F.R.1003.23(b)(4)(ii). An alien is placed on
notice of proceedings if she receives the NTA. See Velasquez-Escovar v. Holder, 768 F.3d I 000,
1005 (9th Cir. 2014) ("[T]he NTA warns aliens that they will be removed in absentia if they fail
to appear.... "); Matter of G-Y-R-, 23 I&N Dec. 181, 188-89 (BIA 2001). Following proper
service of the NTA, a hearing notice, including a notice of change in time or place of
proceedings, may be served, in person or by mail, on the alien. INA 239(a)(2)(A). However, no
written notice is required "if the alien has failed to provide [her] address," as she is required to
do by the Act. INA 240(b)(5)(B); see also Velasquez-Escovar, 768 F.3d at 1003-04.
Specifically, an alien "must provide the Attorney General immediately with a written record of
any change of the alien's address or telephone number." INA 239(a)(l )(F)(ii).
Here, the lead respondent did not provide her new address to the Court. The NTA
personally served upon her warned her that she "must notify the Immigration Court immediately
by using Form EOIR-33 whenever [she] change[s] [her] address." Exh. 1 at 2. In her declaration,
the respondent admits that as of December 5, 2014, she had changed her address. MTR at 7. She
states that gave her address to the ICE officer at her appointment on that date. Id. She did not,
however, provide the new address to the Court as she was required to do. 1 See id; see also INA
239(a)(l)(F)(ii). Because the respondents failed to fulfill their obligation under the Act, they
were not entitled to notice. See INA 240(b)(5)(B); Velasquez-Escovar, 768 F.3d at 1003-04.
Therefore, the Court denies the respondents' motion to reopen.

Respondent filed a change of address form with the Board of Immigration Appeals on March 20, 2015. It was
received by the Court on April 13, 2015.

A206-3 l 0-445
A206-3 l 0-446

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

on February 24, 2015. The respondents failed to appear at their hearing. The Court then granted
the DHS's motion to proceed in absentia, found that the DHS had established removability by
clear and convincing evidence, and ordered the respondents removed in absentia to Honduras.
See IJ Removal Proceedings Order (Feb. 24, 2015); see also Exh. 2. On March 30, 2015, the
respondents, through counsel, filed a motion to reopen and rescind the in absentia order of
removal, asserting a lack of proper notice of their hearing date. Respondent Motion to Rescind in
Absentia Removal Order and to Reopen Proceedings, at 4 (Mar. 30, 2015) [hereinafter "MTR"].
The DHS filed its opposition on April 14, 2015. The Department's Opposition to the
"Respondent Motion to Rescind in Absentia Removal Order and to Reopen Proceedings" (Apr.
14, 2015). The respondents replied on April 17, 2015. Respondent Reply to Department's
Response (Apr. 17, 2015). For the following reasons, the Court denies the respondents' motion
to reopen.

ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the respondents' motion to reopen removal proceedings and
rescind the in absentia order of removal is DENIED.
/

CERTIFICATE OF SER
VICE
T I S OCUiv!E.JT \IVJJ,
S SERVED BY MAIL <Mf

Pt::RSONAL SERV/C
i:
.... (p)
TO f l t L

CustOdia! Officer
I
I
DATE:!:2::t1Attach;r1tmts ( J EOIR
f J EOIR-28
f J Legal Se1vices list -3:3
Other

bl-iLifi ko
IS av:cOuT
PtPPzAL
P<=Xc. T

A206-310-445
A206-310-446

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

Immigration Judge