Matter of Josefina ARAMBULA-BRAVO, Respondent

Summary

The next installment in the ongoing series, 'what is a notice to appear, anyway?', Arambula-Bravo specifies, among other things, that parole granted upon entry to the country is extinguished upon issuance of the NTA. This has additional consequences that may not be immediately apparent; it can, for example, change a certain legal status of a respondent, e.g. from 'arriving alien' to 'entered without inspection'. This can have effects on bond proceedings, sometimes preventing, or sometimes allowing for, bond to be set.

Holding

(1) A Notice to Appear that does not specify the time and place of a respondent's initial removal hearing does not deprive the Immigration Judge of jurisdiction over the respondent's removal proceedings.

(2) A Notice to Appear that lacks the time and place of a respondent's initial removal hearing constitutes a “charging document” as defined in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.13 (2021), and is sufficient to terminate a noncitizen's grant of parole under 8 C.F.R. § 212.5(e)(2)(i)(2021).

Cited authorities

Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018), and Niz-Chavez v. Garland, 141 S. Ct. 1474 (2021), distinguished; Matter of Bermudez-Cota, 27 I&N Dec. 441 (BIA 2018), and Matter of Rosales Vargas and Rosales Rosales, 27 I&N Dec. 745 (BIA 2020), followed.