Arsen Sarkisov v. Pamela Bondi -Board of Immigration Appeals
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Affirmed
A Russian national sought review of the BIA’s refusal to reopen his removal proceedings after he filed a late VAWA-based motion, arguing that domestic-abuse-related trauma constituted “extraordinary circumstances.” The Sixth Circuit held that it has jurisdiction to review the BIA’s extraordinary-circumstances determination, but it found no error in the agency’s conclusion that a six-year delay was not excused, and therefore denied (affirmed) the BIA decision.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether federal courts have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) to review the Board of Immigration Appeals’ determination that a VAWA petitioner failed to show the “extraordinary circumstances” necessary to waive the time-limit for an untimely motion to reopen under 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(iv)(III).
Circuit Positions
BIA's extraordinary-circumstances ruling is a mixed question of law and fact reviewable under § 1252(a)(2)(D).
Determination is discretionary and therefore unreviewable under § 1252(a)(2)(B).
Conflict Summary
The Fifth, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits treat the ‘extraordinary-circumstances’ determination as a mixed question of law and fact that is reviewable under the statutory “constitutional or legal questions” safe harbor. The First, Second, Third, Fourth, and Seventh Circuits (largely in pre-Guerrero-Lasprilla decisions) hold that the determination is an unreviewable discretionary judgment barred by § 1252(a)(2)(B).