8 C.F.R. § 1003.35

Depositions and subpoenas

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

(a) Depositions. If an Immigration Judge is satisfied that a witness is not reasonably available at the place of hearing and that said witness' testimony or other evidence is essential, the Immigration Judge may order the taking of deposition either at his or her own instance or upon application of a party. Such order shall designate the official by whom the deposition shall be taken, may prescribe and limit the content, scope, or manner of taking the deposition, and may direct the production of documentary evidence.

(b) Subpoenas issued subsequent to commencement of proceedings—(1) General. In any proceeding before an Immigration Judge, other than under 8 CFR part 335, the Immigration Judge shall have exclusive jurisdiction to issue subpoenas requiring the attendance of witnesses or for the production of books, papers and other documentary evidence, or both. An Immigration Judge may issue a subpoena upon his or her own volition or upon application of the Service or the alien.

(2) Application for subpoena. A party applying for a subpoena shall be required, as a condition precedent to its issuance, to state in writing or at the proceeding, what he or she expects to prove by such witnesses or documentary evidence, and to show affirmatively that he or she has made diligent effort, without success, to produce the same.

(3) Issuance of subpoena. Upon being satisfied that a witness will not appear and testify or produce documentary evidence and that the witness' evidence is essential, the Immigration Judge shall issue a subpoena. The subpoena shall state the title of the proceeding and shall command the person to whom it is directed to attend and to give testimony at a time and place specified. The subpoena may also command the person to whom it is directed to produce the books, papers, or documents specified in the subpoena.

(4) Appearance of witness. If the witness is at a distance of more than 100 miles from the place of the proceeding, the subpoena shall provide for the witness' appearance at the Immigration Court nearest to the witness to respond to oral or written interrogatories, unless there is no objection by any party to the witness' appearance at the proceeding.

(5) Service. A subpoena issued under this section may be served by any person over 18 years of age not a party to the case.

(6) Invoking aid of court. If a witness neglects or refuses to appear and testify as directed by the subpoena served upon him or her in accordance with the provisions of this section, the Immigration Judge issuing the subpoena shall request the United States Attorney for the district in which the subpoena was issued to report such neglect or refusal to the United States District Court and to request such court to issue an order requiring the witness to appear and testify and to produce the books, papers or documents designated in the subpoena.

[62 FR 10335, Mar. 6, 1997]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 37 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 2007–2026 · leading case: Stolaj v. Holder

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Stolaj v. Holder (2009) ca6 · cites it 4× “8 C.F.R. § 1003.35 (b)(2). The IJ denied the Stolajs' motion because they failed to comply with the requirements of this provision.”

Olakunle Oshodi v. Eric H. Holder Jr. (2013) ca9 · cites it 2× “§ 1229a(b)(4)(B); 8 C.F.R. §§ 1240.10 (a)(4), 1240.”

Raul Antia-Perea v. Eric Holder, Jr. (2014) ca7 · cites it 2× “” He ruled that “[t]he regulations governing subpoenas require at least that much,” and cited in support 8 C.F.R. § 1003.35 (b)(2), which by its terms requires a party applying for a subpoena “to state in writing or at the proceeding, what he or she expects to prove by such…”

Mohsen Karroumeh v. Loretta Lynch (2016) ca7 · cites it 3× “subpoena issued to Wright, the BIA found that only the party seeking the subpoena could claim the benefits of the enforcement provision found at 8 C.F.R. § 1003.35 (b)(6). The BIA also rejected Karroumeh’s claim that Wright’s sworn statement should not have been allowed as…”

Oliva-Ramos v. Attorney General of the United States (2012) ca3 “Here, the IJ’s refusal to grant the subpoenas is contrary to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.35 (b). Under that regulation, “[a]n Immigration Judge may issue a subpoena upon his or her own volition or upon application of the Service or the alien.”

Vidinski v. Lynch (2016) ca7 “8 C.F.R. § 1003.35 (b)(6). During the hearing, when it became apparent that Ms.”

Malave v. Holder (2010) ca7 “) Instead the IJ stated that a subpoena would be futile, because if Manuela had not found Jose in the last ten years, she never would.”

Parashu Giri v. Loretta E. Lynch (2015) ca7 “§ 1229a(b)(l)) (recognizing the immigration court’s subpoena power); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1003.35 (b). Parashu’s counsel disingenuously argues for leniency because Parashu was appearing pro se until the day of the merits hearing.”

United States v. Arroyo (2018) txwd “42 (a) ("Jurisdiction for an Immigration Judge to review an adverse credible fear finding by an asylum officer .”

Tatyana Sova v. Eric Holder, Jr. (2011) ca6 · cites it 3× “” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.35 (b)(1). IfthelJ is unsuccessful in obtaining the appearance of the witness, it is told to enlist the help of the district attorney: If a witness neglects or refuses to appear and testify as directed by the subpoena served upon him or her in accordance with…”

M-K (2026) bia · cites it 3× “8 C.F.R. § 1003.35 (b)(2) (2026). The respondent does not clearly indicate why he sought a subpoena under 8 C.”

Zyapkov v. Lynch (2016) ca7 “§ 1229a(b)(l); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.35 (b)(1), (2). And he points to no regulation requiring the government to call its investigators to testify.”

Show all 37 citing cases →

— 8 C.F.R. § 1003.35(b) — 1 case

Jose Constanza-Martinez v. Eric H. Holder, Jr. (2014) ca8

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.