Cite as: 28 I&N Dec. 494 (BIA 2022) Interim Decision #4039 Matter of M-M-A-, Respondent Decided March 11, 2022 U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals When the Department of Homeland Security raises the mandatory bar for filing a frivolous asylum application under section 208(d)(6) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1158(d)(6) (2018), an Immigration Judge must make sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law on whether the requirements for a frivolousness determination under Matter of Y-L-, 24 I&N Dec. 151 (BIA 2007), have been met. FOR THE RESPONDENT: Elias Z. Shamieh, Esquire, San Francisco, California FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY: Jennifer L. Castro, Assistant Chief Counsel BEFORE: Board Panel: WILSON and GOODWIN, Appellate Immigration Judges. Dissenting Opinion: GREER, Appellate Immigration Judge. WILSON, Appellate Immigration Judge: In a decision dated June 26, 2018, the Immigration Judge granted the respondent’s application for adjustment of status under section 245(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a) (2018), and his application for a waiver of inadmissibility under section 212(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(i) (2018). The Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) has appealed from this decision, arguing that the respondent filed a frivolous asylum application and was therefore barred from the requested relief. See section 208(d)(6) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1158(d)(6) (2018). The appeal will be sustained, the Immigration Judge’s decision vacated, and the record remanded. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The following facts are undisputed. The respondent was admitted to the United States in 2007. In August 2010, he filed an affirmative asylum application with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”). In his application, the respondent claimed that his father was a founder of, and held a leadership position in, the Southern Movement in Yemen, which called for the secession of South Yemen. He stated in his 494 Cite as: 28 I&N Dec. 494 (BIA 2022) Interim Decision #4039 application that he and his brother were also members of this group and that he had been a member since 2003. The respondent claimed that his father was being held in prison in Yemen because of his involvement in this group and that arrest warrants had been issued for the respondent and his brother. He further claimed that if he entered Yemen, he would immediately be arrested and imprisoned and that he would likely be tortured. The respondent signed the application, swearing to the truth of its contents. He attached a declaration repeating this same claim, as well as a document purporting to be a Yemeni arrest warrant. He attended two administrative interviews with asylum officers and at both interviews, he swore to tell the truth. The respondent received notice of the consequences of filing a frivolous asylum application and acknowledged that if he filed a frivolous asylum application, he could be “permanently ineligible for any benefits” under the Act. Section 208(d)(4)(A), (6) of the Act. USCIS denied the respondent’s application and placed him …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals