Muro, Roxana V., Esq Law Offices of Roxana V. Muro 3530 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1600 Los Angeles, CA 90010

U.S. Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board of Immigration Appeals Office of the Clerk

5 J 0 7 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000 Falls Cl111rch, Virginia 20530

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel • BAL 31 Hopkins Plaza, Room 1600 Baltimore, MD 21201

Name: SORTO-VIERA, MIRNA ISABEL A 076-316-387

Date of this notice: 6/19/2014

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

Enclosure

Panel Members: Guendelsberger, John Hoffman, Sharon Manuel, Elise

Sincerely,

bonnL c a.NtJ

Donna Carr Chief Clerk

williame Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished

Imm

igrant & Refugee A

ppellate Center | w

ww

.irac.net

Cite as: Mirna Isabel Sorto-Viera, A076 316 387 (BIA June 19, 2014)

U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Falls Church, Vil:ginia 20530

File: A076 316 387-Baltimore, r..ID

In re: MIRNA ISABEL SORTO-VIERA

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

APPEAL

Date:

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Roxana V. Muro, Esquire

ONBEHALF OFDHS: MaryC.Lee Assistant Chief Counsel

APPLICATION: Reopening

JUN 19 2014

The respondent, a native and citizen of El Salvador, was ordered removed in absentia on February 13, 2001. On November 20, 2012, the respondent filed a motion to reopen proceedings, which the Immigration Judge denied on April 11, 2013. The respondent filed a timely appeal of that decision. The appeal will be sustained, proceedings will be reopened and the record will be remanded.

The Immigration Judge denied the respondent's motion to reopen finding that she had failed to establish that she did not receive proper notice for her February 13, 2001, hearing. In support of her motion to reopen proceedings, the respondent has submitted an affidavit in which it is indicated that she did not receive notice for her hearing. The record reflects that the respondent attended multiple prior hearings. Moreover, it is unclear from the record copy of the notice for the February 13, 2001, hearing when it was mailed to the respondent. The certificate of service indicates that it was mailed on February 13, 2001, the same date as the hearing and if so, it was improper notice for the hearing. In view of the totality of circumstances presented in this case, we will allow the respondent another opportunity to appear for a hearing.

ORDER: The appeal is sustained, the in absentia order is rescinded, the proceedings are reopened, and the record is remanded to the Immigration Judge for further proceedings.

Imm

igrant & Refugee A

ppellate Center | w

ww

.irac.net

Cite as: Mirna Isabel Sorto-Viera, A076 316 387 (BIA June 19, 2014)

. .

r �

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW

IMMIGRATION COURT BALTIMORE MD

In the matter of SORTO VVIERA, MIRNA I. A number: A 076316387

ORDER OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE

Upon consideration of the RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO REOPEN ORDER ENTERED IN ABSENTIA BASED ON LACK OF NOTICE, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to DENIED because:

The respondent argues that even though when a second notice of the hearing was sent with the correct address, it was addressed to the respondent's former guardian and not to the respondent, who had reached majority by that time, and the former guardian was not living at that address at that time, it is likely that the postal service did not deliver the letter, because the named former guardian was not living there. The court views this as stark speculation. It is more likely that the letter was in fact delivered. The respondent having claimed to have appeared at 11 previous master calendars and now no long a

minor would be expected to be aware that such a notice would be coming. The respondent contends that had the notice been received, the respondent would have qualified for TPS, as if the respondent were estopped from seeking TPS. The order of removal in absentia was entered on February 13, 2001. The respondent files this motion to reopen on November 20, 2012 . .. nearly 11 years later with no explanation as to the delay.

04/11/2013 Date ��� vid W. Crosland

Immigration Judge

Certificate of Service

This document was served.B�on 04/15/2013 to AITORNEY ROXANA V. MURO OHS

ByHCD

Imm

igrant & Refugee A

ppellate Center | w

ww

.irac.net

Cite as: Mirna Isabel Sorto-Viera, A076 316 387 (BIA June 19, 2014)