8 C.F.R. § 1003.33
Translation of documents
Any foreign language document offered by a party in a proceeding shall be accompanied by an English language translation and a certification signed by the translator that must be printed legibly or typed. Such certification must include a statement that the translator is competent to translate the document, and that the translation is true and accurate to the best of the translator's abilities.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2004–2025 · leading case: Mooneer Riad Tawadrus v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen., 364 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir. 2004).
Mooneer Riad Tawadrus v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen., 364 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir. 2004). “33 (Now located at 8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 ) states: Any foreign language document , offered by a party in a proceeding shall be accompanied by an English language translation and a certification signed by the translator that must be printed legibly or typed.”
Ramaj v. Gonzales, 466 F.3d 520 (6th Cir. 2006). “8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 . As stated above, the purported signature of the translator appears on the face of the two Exhibit 8 documents.”
Vladimir Ivanovich Krasnopivtsev v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen. of the United States of Am., 382 F.3d 832 (8th Cir. 2004). “See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 (requiring a foreign language document to be accompanied by an English language translation and a certification signed by the translator).”
Badwan v. Gonzales, 494 F.3d 566 (6th Cir. 2007). “The government responded that Badwan was ineligible for relief because he had not presented sufficient evidence of a valid divorce from Bryan — because in particular he had failed to obtain a proper translation of the divorce document, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 , and the…”
Leonard v. Lentz, 297 F. Supp. 3d 874 (N.D. Iowa 2017). “Although petitioner did not comply with 8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 's requirement that translated documents be accompanied by a translator's certification, respondent did not object to the admission of the translated exhibits, and the Court declines to consider the objection sua sponte.”
Morales Apolinar v. Mukasey, 514 F.3d 893 (9th Cir. 2008). “The BIA incorrectly concluded the English-language documents did not comply with 8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 because they were not accompanied by a certification of translation.”
D-r, 25 I. & N. Dec. 445 (BIA 2011). “8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 (2010) (providing that any foreign language document must be translated into English to be admissible in Immigration Court).”
Quan Lin v. Gonzales, 152 F. App'x 475 (6th Cir. 2005). “The second set of documents, filed two weeks prior to the hearing, purported to be English translations of Chinese documents and with one exception, were not accompanied by the Chinese originals as required under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 . Lin’s attorney claimed that the originals of…”
Nadeem v. Holder, 599 F.3d 869 (8th Cir. 2010). “See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 . The State Department investigation found that Pakistani records contradicted the information report and arrest warrant offered by Nadeem.”
Nadal-Ginard v. Holder, 558 F.3d 61 (1st Cir. 2009). “It is true that foreign language documents are normally required to be accompanied by an English translation, 8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 , and that illegible documents are often useless.”
Feng Ying Li v. Attorney Gen. of the United States, 446 F. App'x 501 (3rd Cir. 2011). “See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 (describing requirements for translation of documents).”
Shehu v. Gonzales, 151 F. App'x 437 (6th Cir. 2005). “Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.33 , any foreign language document offered at an immigration hearing “shall be accompanied by an English language translation and a certification signed by the translator that must be printed legibly or typed.”
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.