Lee & Garasia, LLC
Tel: 732-516-1717
Toll Free: 888-404-5876
Experience, Accessibility, and Excellence
for Over 20 Years
“When it comes to immigration, I go to Paris and Angie–and trust me, I know a lot of lawyers all over the world.”–Renzo Gracie, Brazilian Jiujitsu and MMA Legend 
Read More
“Lee and Garasia are excellent lawyers, punctual and professional. They are dedicated to going above and beyond the usual level of service to meet your client’s needs. Their staff is very knowledgeable, friendly and polite. I would highly… recommend this firm to anyone.”
Read More
“I would definitely recommend Mr.Lee and Garasia as an immigration attorney because they did a great job with my case i.e. of Adjustment of Status (i-485). Mr. Lee helped us in each and every detailed information and prepared to the best of it. It was all well done and would like to appreciate.”
Read More
“I would like to thank my lawyer Mr Lee & Garasia and the staff for all immense help and patience throughout this entire process, I really appreciate your constant attention to my case, as well to my questions and my concerns. You’ve really made this process much more comprehensive to me, which I greatly appreciate.”
Read More
“Mr. Lee and Ms. Garasia did a great job with my renewal of my permanent residence application. They help prepare the paperwork with such a great attention to details and accuracy. I will recommend the law firm every time.”
Read More
“Mr. Lee did a great job with the renewal of my permanent residence application. My case was very time sensitive and they worked really fast on my case with great detail and accuracy. I will recommend the law firm every time.”
Read More
“I would recommend Attorney Paris Lee for anybody who needs immigration consultation. Mr. Lee is THE lawyer who respects and cares clients. Mr. Lee is professional and honest. Bottom line, preparation for the results and NO BS!”
Read More
“Stalin – Lee did a wonderful job, Got my wife her visa in one year. He is extremely helpful and knowledgeable. I would highly recommend him for all your immigration needs.”
Read More
“Hello. I appoint him as my immigration lawyer and that way he solved my cases was truly amazing. He was so honest and knowledgeable for his work. He solved my all family immigration issues and because of his effort we were able to get done our immigration work done successful. Thank you lee and garasia.”
Read More
“Lee & Garasia stand for accountability and responsibility. They are reliable, honest and are always constructively looking for a solution. A big thanks :)”
Read More

New Ruling Curbs Immigration Court’s Power to Dismiss or Terminate Deportation Cases

| Sep 24, 2018 | Immigration Court, Immigration Court Cases

On September 18, 2018, Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued Matter of S-O-G & F-D-B, 27 I & N Dec. 462 (A.G. 2018), the latest in a trifecta of cases curtailing the authority of immigration judges. Under this new ruling, judges are strictly prohibited from terminating or dismissing cases “for reasons other than those expressly set out in the relevant regulations or where DHS has failed to sustain the charges of removability.” As it stands, the regulations set out only a limited number of circumstances under which the court may dismiss proceedings. On motion by DHS government counsel, a judge may dismiss proceedings where

· The Notice to Appear was improvidently issued

· Circumstances of the case have changed after the Notice to Appear was issued to such an extent that continuation is no longer in the best interest of the government

Judges may also terminate to allow a person to pursue naturalization when he/she has established prima facie eligibility and the matter involves exceptionally appealing or humanitarian factors. Besides these circumstances and a small set of scenarios cited by the decision, “in every other case, the removal hearing shall be completed as promptly as possible.”

What this essentially means, in practical terms, is that judges are no longer allowed to exercise their discretion to terminate cases, as they have been doing when appropriate. In one of the cases involved, for example, the immigration judge had terminated proceedings, over the objection of the government, after the respondent had obtained approval of her I-601A provisional waiver. The government had argued that instead of termination, the respondent should have sought voluntary departure, which also puts an end to the case. But unlike termination, voluntary departure would compel her to depart the United States much earlier than anticipated and risk complications at the consulate abroad-something which the court and the BIA on appeal both recognized, but which did not persuade the Attorney General. As a consequence, termination of proceedings may no longer be a viable option for individuals with similar situations.

Together with Matter of Castro-Tum, which eviscerates the court’s ability to administratively close cases, and Matter of L-A-B-R, which hamstrings the court’s power to grant continuances, this ruling clearly demonstrates the Attorney General’s resolve to wrest control of the courts to implement stricter standards in line with the current Administration’s mandate.

The above is general information only and not to be relied upon as legal advice. It does not create an attorney-client relationship, nor should it be relied upon as advice in lieu of consultation with an attorney.

Findlaw Network