Matter of Perez-Andrade, Interim Decision Number 3025

• Decision Date: 13 March 1987
• Docket Number: Interim Decision Number 3025,A-23067026.,A-23067022.
• Parties: MATTER OF PEREZ-ANDRADE. In Deportation Proceedings.
• Court: U.S. DOJ Board of Immigration Appeals

19 I&N Dec. 433

MATTER OF PEREZ-ANDRADE.

In Deportation Proceedings.

Interim Decision Number 3025

A-23067022.

A-23067026.

Board of Immigration Appeals.

Decided by Board March 13, 1987.

(1) A request for a continuance was properly denied by the immigration judge because the respondents did not show good cause for a continuance.

(2) A deportation hearing was properly held in absentia where the respondents, without reasonable cause, failed to appear for the hearing.

(3) In the absence of a brief in support of their appeal, a reasonable explanation for the respondents' failure to appear for the hearing or a demonstration that they were prejudiced in any manner, a summary dismissal of the appeal pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 3.1(d)(1-a)(iv) (1987) is appropriate.

CHARGE:

Order: Act of 1952 — Sec. 241(a)(2) [8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(2)] — Entered without inspection (both respondents)

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS: Martin R. Guajardo, Esquire 601 Montgomery Street, Suite 1217 San Francisco, California 94111

ON BEHALF OF SERVICE: Jane Leroe General Attorney

BY: Milhollan, Chairman; Dunne, Morris, Vacca, and Heilman, Board Members.

In a decision dated July 3, 1985, an immigration judge found the respondents deportable on the charge set forth above. The decision was rendered at a hearing held in absentia due to the respondents' failure to appear. The immigration judge denied the respondents' applications for suspension of deportation under section 244(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1254(a)(1) (1982), because of their failure to appear and prosecute their applications. He granted both respondents voluntary departure. The respondents have appealed. The appeal will be dismissed summarily.

The respondents are a husband and wife, natives and citizens of Mexico. The Orders to Show Cause and Notice of Hearing (Forms I-221) allege that they entered the United States in June and August 1974, respectively, without submitting themselves for inspection. At a deportation hearing held on August 6, 1984, the respondents, with the assistance of counsel, admitted the allegations in the Orders to Show Cause, conceded deportability, and requested an opportunity to file applications for suspension of deportation. The immigration judge granted a continuance and scheduled a hearing on their applications for July 3, 1985, at 2:30 p.m. Counsel waived further notice.

On July 3, 1985, counsel appeared for the hearing, but the respondents did not. Counsel had no explanation why they were not present but requested a continuance. The immigration judge proceeded with the hearing in absentia.

On appeal, the respondents contend that the immigration judge abused his discretion in denying counsel's request for a continuance made when the respondents failed to appear for their hearing. The respondents have not explained this contention or submitted a brief in support of the appeal.

The regulations...