Mauro Martinez-Reyes, A205 002 826 (BIA Sept. 25, 2014)

8/11/2019 Mauro Martinez-Reyes, A205 002 826 (BIA Sept. 25, 2014)

1/12

Allison McCahyCole & Vondra, P209 E. Washigto St, Ste 305Iw City, A 52240

Name: MARTNEZREYES, MAURO

U D f J

Executive Oce r Imigraion Revew

Board ofmmigration Appealsc ofthe erk

507 Leesbg Pike, Se 2000Fal hch Vgna 20530

HS/CE ice of Cief Counse OMA1717 Avenue Omaa, NE 68110

A 205002-826

Date of tis otice: 9/5/2014

osed s a opy of he Boa's ecision an order e above-rerece case.

Enclosure

My R W

Sineely,

D ctDonna Car

Cief Cerk

'\z

m: k

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished

Cite as: Mauro Martinez-Reyes, A205 002 826 (BIA Sept. 25, 2014)


2/12

, S. Dpamn of Juscxete Oce ao Reew

Decso of e Boa o gto eas

F hh Vga 20530

File: A205 002 826 Oma, E

I re: RO RIEZYES

I MOA PROCEEGS

APPEA

O BEHALF OF RESPODE: Alison McChy, Esqire

O BEHALF OF DHS

CARGE:

risi LinseyAssi Chief Consel

Dae

oice: Sec 12(a)6)A)i), I&N Ac 8 USC 82(a)(6)(A)i)] Presen iho being amited or poe

APLICAION Moo o sppess erminaion

SEP 2 5 14

The respone appes e Iigraio dges ecision dae Apri 12, 2013 TheImmgraion ge eie he respoens Mch 8, 012, moion o sppres ee Exhs 3 4

e Immigraion Jdge aso se he removabiiy chrge in he oice o Appe (Exh ) gred he respone vony epre reqe prs o secion 40B(b) of heImmigraion aioiy Ac, 8 SC 1229c(b) The respondes rees oale i e enied ee 8 C. FR 003 (e)(7) 204) he ecor il be remed

The resoen caims tha Ocober 13 0, e car he a iving as sopped by apolice ocer om e Cear Rapis Police Departmen CRPD) r legely havig decivel lps ee Respondes Br a 2 he respone saes ha e poice ofce ske him rhis drivers icee, proof of isce, poof of ciienship ee i Aer he police ofcerreceive e repoens ideicaion, he ofcer alegedly iicae ha he beieveResponden ilegal igr d then ordere Respoden o ge o of he vehce

ee Acoig o he reponen, aer concing a searc of he respone d hisvehicled esionig e vehicles assengers as t e respone's imigaio sashe ocer ol he respone ha e beig ree r sever rcreaedmm g" S ; see als wa Dstc C um eng g ) impoper re lps 2 o rives lcense, n (3) no isce Case Nmbers 888093,888091, 8092 especiely) While atenig a heing on Ocobe 14 a e i CoyDisic Co r his afc oenes, e responden portedly lee r te s ime a hehad osig n r ale pacces i he i egree ee Responens Bra 3 Dng his eenion a e in Cony Jl, e repoden as eogaed yAge Aio om e Depmen of Home Secriy S d alleely ame the as a ciie aioa of Mexico ho enere e cory aly ee x 2Form I23) eeae, he as rsfeed m e coy of he CRD o he csoy of e

Cite as Mau o Ma ti e Reyes A205 002 826 (BIA Sept 25 2014)


3/12

A205 002 826

Immaon Csoms Enforcemen. See Responens Br. a 3. On Ocober 7, 2011,aNoce o Appear as sse by the DHS aleging he above charge Exh 1 ).

On appeal, the esponen es hat he Imigraion Jge ee by enyng he moon osppess r amng he 213 no eence io rs anng hs reqes r aneenary hearng (Responens Br. a 45, 213). The responen ainns ha hs sop anaes ere egregos volaons of his Foh Amenmen rgs as hey ere racaly movae lacking reasonable sspcion Responens B. a 3, 145) He aso saes tha s FhAmenen ghs ere violae as his saemens o DS Agen Atio ere no olygven, b raer semme om e agens coercve neogaon Responens Br. a 1516).

In S v LopezMendoza 468 .S. 032, 10505 1984), he Spreme Co hel ha heFoh Amenmen exclsonary rle s genealy napplcabe o eporaon poceengs, ble open he possbly of applyng hs le f here re egregos Forth Amenmen volaonshch ansgress Fh Aenmen noons of amena ess an nerne he probavevae of he evence See als Lopez-Gabriel v. Hlder 653 F.3 683, 686 8h Cr 2011)expressng ob o heher he exclsona rle shol apply n mmaon prceengson he bass of conc by stae or loc polce ofcers, even n e case of eegos volaons,b lmaely ring ha e reco no sppor peiones belef tha c sop d aresee racaly moae) PucRuiz v Holder 629 F.3 77, 778 8h Cr. 2010) nong haeegos violaons e no lme o cases nvolvng physcal baiy).

Ths Bo has recoize ha ahogh he exclsona rle s generay napplcable nremova poceengs, sppresson s approprae here e evience as obane in a maer soegregos ha is se ol violae e process by oenng he eqiemens of namentalfaess. See, e.g, Matter of Tor 17 &N Dec 340, 343 BIA 1980) Matter f Garcia 7 &NDec 319, 321 BIA 1980). alen seekng he exclson of evence base on he ForhAenmen bears he bren of esablshng a pra e ce ha he eence shol besppresse See Matter of Tang 13 I&N Dec 69, 692 BIA 1971) Ony hen alen hascome th aeqae evence n sppor o sppresson ll he bren sh o he DHSo js the mane n hch obane e eence See d; see also Maer of Barceas19 &N Dec 609, 6112 BIA 1988) This Boar ha also hel ha an 213 s nherenlysorhy an amssble o prove alenage absen y ncaon ha i conans foaonha s ncoec o as obane by coercon or ess. See Maer of GomezGomez 23 I&NDec. 522, 524 BIA 2002) Matter ofPonceHernandez 22 &N Dec. 784, 785 BIA 1999).

In hs ce, e Iaon Jge rece e relev aeork r aalyzing a moo osppress n he reoval conex b no make scen ca an creblty nngs rposes of or appelae revie. In paclar, he Immiaon ge appee o hanohing abo he responns neracion ih he migraon agen i.e, ho eerine hahe as a emovable alen) or he aesng oce suggess egegous conc ha ola the sppresson of e 213, b e Immgaon Jge no make clear speccnngs as o e crcmsaces caed n he cren recor h regar o he polce ocerssop, aes, a eenon, or h respec o he csoial neogaon by he DS agenI. J a 34). Also, he Imaon Jge no aress he afav le by he esponens

2



4/12

A205 002 826

niee who poely was a wiess to his stop est (Respondent's Brat 13-14; Exh4 at7980

n adtion e mmation Juge did not aeately assess he resondent's claim tat estatements ontane n te 2 e inteally inonsstent inacurate d not reliable SeeExh at 14 Despite the mmgration Judge's nding that the respondent proide insuientevience to ueston the reiability of e -21 (J at 4 his ecisio does not sucienlyadess the responent's laim that the audulent prates wt was not he ue reason rhs aest sne he was not notied aout this wart until he day er hs est (Responent'srat 14-5) See ls Exh 4 at respondent's aavit contening hat contry to e 1'sstatement that he was arrested by the CRPD r an outstanding wrant r auulent practiesnthe hrd degree he was tod by he poice ocer that the basis r is aest w "r tikets d specily that [his] igts were not working n s regd we are not persuaedat this ime by the DHS's ontention that the "responent was stoppe r a iolationregaring a roken tail light no iense nd no insue n adtion to outsting rimnalw t r Frauulent Praes the reord s ucear a to he rses of eresonent's stop nd his discover of the rinal wrt (DS's Br at 9-10

The respodent aso disputes the -213s desciption of his iigraton hisory invoving woests b e Border Patrol on Septeer ad 4 011 on e basis that he was shown reorswhile detane indiating that e aests aually occue in 00 See Exh 4 at 2 We ndnavailing the DS's argument that it aready ha ination about the responent's alienageas he was twie olunarily reed to Mexio given at he 213 does not speci to where hew reed d moreoer e DHS has not responded to his claim that e -1 misstates thedate of s pior res DHS's Br at 10 ight of the reoig we oncle tat herproceeings ae necessary we are nable to adeatey review the migration Jdge'sonclusions See Me f SH 2 &N Dec 462 465 (BA 002) (gien e Bo's limtedfactndng ability it is "inreingly import r te mmigration Judge to me lear dcomplete ndigs o t hat e supoe y the reord d in ompice wi onolliglaw

n sm we wl remd hs case to the igation Jdge to ake the neessr ctundings in the rs inste See CFR 00(d)(iv) n paicul ere remain openuestions to the rcsanes surrounding the respondent's arrest y the CRPD the naure ofhs inteogation y S Agent Autio d the relailiy of the -21 The mmigration Jugeshould ressess e inrmation containe in te 21 to determie if it c sppor the ningof alienage an then deteine whether that ination can and shoul be suppressedSee Mte fBcens sp at 611-12 Acordingly the reord wil be rede

1 e aso note hat the -whih was composed 4 days er the respondent's Otober 201 eststates that the "suject lais to be a citizen of Mexico y ie of i tconcues y stating tat he "as to not persecution or torture if reed to Honduasan at he "eied te oppotuniy to spea to the Honuras Consulate See Exh2 at 23



5/12

05 002 826

ER he reco s remded to the Immgrato Jge r he poeedingsonsste h the regoig opo and r e e o a ne desio

Board Member Roger A Pauley respectfully dissens and would affi theIigration Judge's decision inding no egregious, if indeed any, FourhAendmen violation. See

Lopez Ferandez v. Holder, 735 F.3d 1043, 1046 n.2(8th Cir. 204). Nor does the responden proide an suppor for his conenionthat his admission to being an alien from Mexico was coerced, apart rom hisbaseless claim tha his saements were the produc o an egregious unlawfulsearch and seizure. See R's rief at 5-16. Remand here is a wase of

resources a a ime when Iigration udge's dockes are burgeoning.

4



6/12

NITE STATES EPARTMENT O SEEXETE OIE OR MMGRATON REEW

GRATON OTOAA NEBRSKA

e #: A205-00282

In he Mae of

Mauo MARTINEZREYES

Resnden.

)))))

ae Ap 12 2013

IN REMOVALPROCEEGS

CARGE Seco 212(a))(A))of e gaon and Naoay Ac ("A)Ae pesen e Uned Saes whou beng admed o poed

APPCATON Obecons o 213 nd Moo o Suppess

ON BEA O RESONENAso McCahy EsCoe & onda 209 E Washgo See Sue 305owa Cy IA 52240

ON BEHAL O THE GOVEMENTKs sey Asssan Chef CouseS epen of omed Secyaon d Cusos Ecee Oaa Nebsa

DECISION OF THE MMIGRTION JUGE

Backgrund and Prcedural Hist

O Ocobe 17 2011 he epae of oed Secy ("S o "hegoee) naed eoa poceedngs agas Respode by ng a Noce o Appea(TA) wh he gao Cou and pesoay seng Respode See Exh 1 The NT Aaeges ha Respoden s a ae ad ce of Mexco who aed he ed Saes a oea now ocao on a ow dae who beg aded o paoed aespecon Id he NT A chages Responde wh eoaby pusuan o e aboecapoed seco of he INA

On Mac 8, 01 Respode houg couse ed a Moo o Suppess dOecos o -213 ("oo o Sppess equesg ha a o e saees and edececonaed n he o 213 Recod of epoabe/adssbe Ae ("I23) he na andsbsee eiews w gao ad Csos Enfocee ("CE ad aacenso he 213 be sppessed See Moo o Suppess a 1 The goeen opposesRespodens oo

1


7/12

I. Smn Law

Roa rodigs e i atur; thrre he potetos tht ap thra otxt do ot ess ap a reoa herg See INS v. opez-Menoza 468US. 102 08 98); Mae ofBaenas 19 &N . 609 611 (B 1988). h

Imigatio ourt is ot oud b the tradito rus o de. See yama v. Asho 57Fd 812 816 8th r 200); Baenas 19 &N at 611 Douet dee sassb f t s rat a protie d its us is daetay fr so as ot to deie therspodt o du pross o the a See ama 57 .d at 86;Mae of oo 7 & De40 (BI 1980)

sodet haegig e egat of eide i reoa proedigs ust estabishapima faie se i supo of supesso br DHS wi be aed uo to just theanr hh it otaid the ide. See Mae of ang 1 I&N . 691 692 (B971);Mae of Won 1 &N e. 820 822 (BI 1971) Statemets made i suport osupresso ust be si detad ad ased o rsoa koege rathr than ojee.

ee Wong 1 I&N e at 822 adait s isuet o ts o to demosrate thatd shoud suppressd; hoer ts aegd an adait oud suppo a asis rudig th eide questo t h esodt must suort his ai b tstoSee Baenas 19 &N e at 61

idett o a rsodet s eer itsef supress "s the ut of th isooustre e a ega arrest or togato oud See opez-Mendoza 68 S at 100;Mae ofanoval 7 & e 70 79 B 979)

A. h Amendmen

The Foh det exusor ru that suprsss statets and other eeotaed as a rsut o a una arrantss arrest ra proeedigs is geraapiab to ii reoa proedigs See opez-Menoza 468 US at 1050. Hoeer thSupre our the Eigth irut ot o ppas and e B hae d ou xeptior irustes that ioe "egrgous oatios o Fouth mdet or other ibtes thatght asgress otos of naet iss d udei th probatie au o theedee obtaid See i at 105051; Pu-Ruiz v Hole 629 Fd 771 77-8 8th r2010); opez-Gabie v Hole 65 Fd 68 686 8th ir 2011); Mae of oo 17 &N .at 4. grgous osttutioa oato s ded as "uta out hih "shoks thosi nd "oeds] th outs ss o ar a ad dee See Pu-Ruiz 629 at 778 (tgRohin v Calonia 2 US 165 1727 (1952)) Whe phsa tais ot ruird thr ust e or tha ega sezur o est r oio to osttuteggous out. See i (itg an ureasoab sho or us of e i arestg d

2 In the Eighth Circui, this exception seems o be naowing. n GaciaTos v Hold the ighth Cicut oof Apeals saed that "[]his Co hs exesse dou whethe even a egegios votio by sae o ococes cod jsti excsion n a dea immation oceeding, but the govent does not raise that pointhere e need ot decide i and w on to deeine tha er was no vdence o egegious conc Gaos v Hold 201 5105808 (8h Ci. Octobe 28, 20) (citing LopzGabl v. old 653 F.3d 68,686 (8 i 201

2


8/12

detaining a respondent and an aest based on race or appeaance as examples of conduc tacoud constiute egregious costiuion violations).

Te Eg Crcu has eld ta a afc violaton - owever mnor - creaes probabecause to stop e driver of a vehcle S v inkou 285 F.3d 716, 719 8 Cir. 2002)

(quong Unied Se v B 98 F.3d 37, 76 (8 Cr. 1996)) (neal quoaons omed).Once a vehicle is vaidy stopped, the police may "conduct an nvestigation reasonaby relaed scope o the prpose of te stop. Uied Se v o 200 Fd 582, 584 (8th C. 2000)citing Unied Se v Blooeld 40 F.3d 910, 915 (8 Cr. 1994). reasonable invesgationcan include questionng of ones immaton status See uehle en 544 US 9 (2005).

Because the bene of applyng he exclusonary ule e imgrao context s odeer uconsiiona conduct by deral immigraton agens, e case r excludng evdencebased upon leged misconduct by a ocal poce ocer is even weer snce any deeen eecwoud be igy atenuated. See opez-biel v Holde 65 F.3d, a 686;ee lo Sndoal17 &N De., at 83 ("[W]en we balce wat we consder to be te remoe likelihood ha e

excusion o ulawly seized evidence om depoaon proceedings would sicanly fcthe conduct of immigraion ofcers wt te socea costs tat coud resut om suc acton ande alteaves available to compe respect r constutional gs, we e no saised aeiter legal or policy consderations dctate the excluson of unlaly seized evidence om[removal] proceedngs.).

B. Fom 1-23, Recod oDepoable/admissible Alien

A Form -21 s an ofcia DHS record hat is generaly sufcient to meet tegovernment's evidentiy burden of esablishing pi fie case of removabily See eof Meji 16 N Dec. 6, 9 (BIA 1976); Me of Goe-Goe 23 N Dec. 522 524 (BI2002). bsent evdence ta a Fo -213 conins inrmaon ha s naccae or obaned bycoercion or duess, i is consdered n ierently truswoy documen amssible despie tehearsay contained wtn the documen. See id illegal aest a leds to te suppresson ofevidece n crimina proceedings as no bearing on remov proceedings. Meia 16 &N Dec,at 8-9 (cing US ex el Bloku v od 263 US 149 (192)). Evdence of pyscalpresence canot be suppressed "it of e posoned ree.

I. Findings an Aalyss

e Co nds tha the goveent as presented sucien evidence justiig hereason r Respondens arrest and subsequent ICE detention. The 213 states at Respondentwas arresed by e Cedar Rapids (owa Polce Departmen o an outsading warran r e

oense of Fraudulent Practces Tird Degree See -2 at Exibit 2 Altough the Responden'safdavit asserts ta he was arested by a Cedr Rapids Poce Deament ocer mproerRear Lamps, No Driver's License, and o Insurance, it also ndicates ta e was inrmed of

the Fraudulent Practces cge wen e appeared in cou te oing day. See respondentsadav at Exbit 4. Wile incarcerated r tese charges e en was ineogated by mmgraton agent wo deemned tat he was a removabe aen ee id Noting about snteraction suggests eregous conduct on behalf of te arrestng oce or hat any of e

3


9/12

ormtion onted ithi e -2 s otin by orio or uress tht ou r suppressio of h -2

toug e rspodt sss t "rism s t r rso I s res, tror dts poi or rsob bss r stoppig Resoet r tr

rtd other rsos (s) Therere ths Co s tt ts tos do ot ostten egrgious voio of espode's oth edmet rigts

Egt ruit oted tt du pross requres tht e o oy osir vtht is "probve d ts dmsso dty r d h "fess s osey r o rbiy d otiss of evd. Bn v. Hlde 55.3 886 8 Cir 009)quog n . Gles 48 F3 04, 0226 8t Cr 2007) Ezen v Asc 3 96 40 rd ir 003) t qoaos d tos om)). hs s,Rsot oposes sso of th 2 s rsued rbe ss re iseviee of res or tht h tio oted the 23 s obe byoero or ss See s Prt B. As prviousy sed, Respo s o dmosred

rmstans tht d te Cou to qsto h reibiy of is douet See s Prt I

e Cout rozs t 2 otis hrsy eve. Hoever, tis is ot tetp of "gy ei harsy of h th Eg Ci Co of Appls s o"mg rs u ross probems n See Bn 5d, t 892. T esyeve n tt se ivoved mutip yers dd ot e t orig spker See d Bse esy is ot probited mgrtio proeeigs, see 8 CR 240.), thrs isuie eid h th hearsy vde otn th -23 s ueb th ods ht ter is o bsis r suprssig th 2 or requrg tht uthor of te 23 ee vib r ross xmitio b Rspodt.

IV Conlson

or e ove-stte resos te Court ds tht Rspodt s fe to estbsh mce i sppot of spprssg h ve ot -3. Trr, theo des s motio to suppress d s tht ts ots ey ad ovigy esbishboth ig d rmovbt.

Ahogh grt v o l ppio r syum d og of rmov, hersodt o o so, g t rqusts ony vouy e smu s h ssttutoiy eigib r ths rm of reef the govee s xprss o opposo, oig orrs herr b etrd:

IT IS EREBY ORDEREDtht Respodet's Motio to uppress is DEND

IT IS FURTER ORDEREDtht n iu o order of rmov rspod bgrnd vouty epature itout xens to e Goveet o or br e , 203, ory xtsio beyod su te s my be grtd y . itio Cstoms

4


10/12

Jj.,

Efocmnt th mn of omlnd Scuiy d und suc conions s thDnt sh imos

IT IS FUTE OEDth h spondnt os volun dt bond i hmou of $500 ihn v 5 busiss dys to h t

IT IS FUTER ORDEDt if sondnt ils o pos th quid bondiin v 5 dys o o dpt hn nd s quid, th pivi of voluny dptu sb ihdwn iou th noic o ocdins nd h own o shl bcom

pon immdily civ Rspondnt sl b movd om nid Ss oxico on h ch cotnd in h Noic o A

James R. Fujim t

Immiio J

5


11/12

A205002826

OCE O ESPODETS

GAED VOUY DEARTUE

You e een ned e piiege o oluni deping o e Uned e o e Teo de ou i ou i o olun dep e Uned e in e e peod

peed emol ode ll uoil e eneed gn o Pu o eon 240B(d) ofe igon d Non A ou i o e uje o e ong pene:

1 You l e ue o l pen o no e n $1000 nd no oe $5000; nd You l e inege peod o 10 e o eee neon o eo

duen o u eg oun depe o ge o nonimgn u

e ou re die ou h

0 ou have been grante pe-concusion vountar epature1 ou e moo o eopen o eonide duing e oun depue peiod e gn

o oun depue e emned uoi e ee ode o eo ke ee mede nd e penle le o dep oui unde eo240B(d o e A l no pp 8 FR 1406((3(ii

ee ii one penl ou o dep in e oun depue peodIn odne e eon e ou e e pepie ou o $000 (o ned o e peupe oun 8 FR 124026

ou have been granted postconcusion vountar eature e ou e n ddionl ondon ou ee ded o he d ee gen n

oppouni o ep o dene hem ou e eped e ou u op i

e ddon ondon 8 FR 406( he ou e e ond on ou ee ded o he ond ou eegien n oppoun o ep o dele A ou e eped ou e du opo ond he Depe o Hoend eui gion nd uoneen Fied Oe eo n uine d o e o ode gngoun depue 8 FR 1406(3(i

3 ou e eeed ou g o ppe en ou e e oue g o ppe edeion ou do ppe ou u pode o e Bod oigon ppe in30 d o ing n ppe uien poo o ng poed e ou epre onde Bod il no ene e oln depue peiod in ode ou do noui el poo o e Bod e olun depue ond een poed

8 FR 1063(i4. ou do o ppe d ed e oo to eopen o eonde dui te un

epe peio e peid oed o epue o e ed oed oexended e gn o oun depue ll e eined uol e eeode o eo ke ee edie nd e penie lue o depolun unde eon 40Bd o e A no pp 8 FR" 14026((3(i(e)l.

5. ee one pel ou o dep e on depe peodn odne i e euo e o e e peupe oun o $3000 (o_ nted o e pepe oun 8 FR 1406


12/12

. .

LIMITAIONS ON DISCRETIONARY RELIEF FOR FAILE TO APP

1 You have been scheduled for a remoal hearing, at te ime an placese forh on he aaced shee Failure o appear for is earingother han becase of excepional circsances beyond yor control**will resul in your being foun ineligible for cerain fos ofrelief uner he Imigraion an Naionaliy Ac (see Section below) for a period of en (0) years afer e dae of eny of hefinal order of reoval

2 You hae been scedled for an asyum earing at he time and placese forh on he atace noice Failre to appear for his earingother an because of exceptional circumsances beyon yor control**will resul in your being found ineligible for certain fors of reliefuner he Immigration and Naionaliy Ac {see Secion A. Below for a

period of en 10 years fro he date of yor scedle earing3 You have been grane volnary departre fro e Unie Saes

pursan o secion 240B of he Imigraion an aionaly Act anreaining in e nite States beyond e aorize da oher an

because of ecepional circusances beyond your conrol** will resltin your beng ineligible for cerain forms of relief er heIigration an Naionaliy Ac see Section A below for ten (10

years from he dae of te scedle deparure or he dae of nlawflreenry respcti vely Your voluntary deprtre bon if any willalso be breace Adiionally if you fail to olntarily depar thenie Saes wiin he ime perio specified, yo shall be sbjecto a civil penaly of no less an $1000 an no more than $5000.

4 A orer of reoal has been enered agains you If yo fail oappear prsant o a final orer of reoal at e time and placeorered by he INS oer han because of excepional circmstancesbeyon your conrol** you will no be eligible for cerain fors ofrelief nder e Immigraion and Naionaliy c see Secion A

below for en (10} years after te dae you are scedule to appear

**e em "excepional circsances refers o circmsances schas serios illness of he alien or eat of an ieiae relatieof he alien, b no inclding less copelling circsances

A H FOMS OF RELIEF FROM RMOVAL FOR WHICH YO ILL BCOM INELIGIBL A:) Volntary deparure as provided for in secion 40B of he

Iigration and Naionaliy Ac;2 Cancellaion of reoval as provide for in secion 40A of he

Iigration and Naionaliy Ac; an3) Asent of stas or cange of saus as proided for in ection

4 48 or 49 of e Imigraion and Naionaliy AcThis writen noice was proide o te alien in nglish Oral noice of

he contens of his noice s be given o e alien in his/her naielanguage or in a lan ge he/she u ersans by e Imigraion JdgeDae Apr 013Imigraion Jge or Cut Clerk

SERVED BYMAIL SONAL SRVIC PTHIS DOCMEN AS

TO [ ALIEN [DATE

f} -/

CRIFICA OF SRVIC ] I c/o Csodial Officer ALIEN's /RP I

Attachmens

BY COT SAFF [ ] OIR-33 [ OIR2 [;_Le-lS erList Oer

Y

Documents

Mauro Martinez-Reyes, A205 002 826 (BIA Sept. 25, 2014)