C.F.R. » Title 8 » CHAPTER V—EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE › SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL PROVISIONS › PART 1003—EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW › Subpart C—Immigration Court—Rules of Procedure

8 C.F.R. § 1003.12

Scope of rules

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

These rules are promulgated to assist in the expeditious, fair, and proper resolution of matters coming before Immigration Judges. Except where specifically stated, the rules in this subpart apply to matters before Immigration Judges, including, but not limited to, deportation, exclusion, removal, bond, rescission, departure control, asylum proceedings, and disciplinary proceedings under this part 3. The sole procedures for review of credible fear determinations by Immigration Judges are provided for in § 1003.42.

[57 FR 11571, Apr. 6, 1992, as amended at 62 FR 10331, Mar. 6, 1997; 65 FR 39526, June 27, 2000]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2018–2026 · leading case: Cecilia Aguilar Fermin v. William Barr, 958 F.3d 887 (9th Cir. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cecilia Aguilar Fermin v. William Barr, 958 F.3d 887 (9th Cir. 2020). “(quoting 8 C.F.R. § 1003.12 ), and a summary of an earlier version of the rules, which stated that “[t]he rules of procedure are interrelated” and “intended to be construed harmoniously,” id.”
Rosales Vargas & Rosales Rosales, 27 I. & N. Dec. 745 (BIA 2020). “Thus, 8 C.F.R. § 1003.12 (2019), entitled “Scope of rules,” states: “These rules are promulgated to assist in the expeditious, fair, and proper resolution of matters coming before Immigration Judges.”
Yith v. Nielsen, 343 F. Supp. 3d 938 (E.D. Cal. 2018). “" 8 C.F.R. § 1003.12 . 8 C.F.R. § 1239.2 (f) provides: An immigration judge may terminate removal proceedings to permit the alien to proceed to a final hearing on a pending application or petition for naturalization when the alien has established prima facie eligibility for…”
Castro-tum, 27 I. & N. Dec. 187 (BIA 2018). “” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.12 (2017). Are there any circumstances where a docket management device other than administrative closure—including a continuance for good cause shown ( 8 C.”
Abner Arcos Sanchez v. Attorney Gen. United States, 860 F. App'x 253 (3d Cir. 2021). “And 8 C.F.R. § 1003.12 advises that the governing regulations are to “assist in the expeditious, fair, and proper resolution of matters.”
Diego Arateco-Munoz v. Pamela Bondi, No. 25-3721 (6th Cir. Mar. 12, 2026). “Arateco Munoz argues that the INA, separate and apart from constitutional due process, imposes a legal requirement that immigration proceedings be fundamentally fair, as demonstrated by regulations such as 8 C.F.R. § 1003.12 . Id. at 22–24. Assuming arguendo that the INA does…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.