In any case in which an appeal has been taken, the party taking the appeal may file a written withdrawal thereof with the office at which the notice of appeal was filed. If the record in the case has not been forwarded to the Board on appeal in accordance with § 1003.5, the decision made in the case shall be final to the same extent as if no appeal had been taken. If the record has been forwarded on appeal, the withdrawal of the appeal shall be forwarded to the Board and, if no decision in the case has been made on the appeal, the record shall be returned and the initial decision shall be final to the same extent as if no appeal had been taken. If a decision on the appeal has been made by the Board in the case, further action shall be taken in accordance therewith. Departure from the United States of a person who is the subject of deportation proceedings subsequent to the taking of an appeal, but prior to a decision thereon, shall constitute a withdrawal of the appeal, and the initial decision in the case shall be final to the same extent as though no appeal had been taken. Departure from the United States of a person who is the subject of deportation or removal proceedings, except for arriving aliens as defined in § 1001.1(q) of this chapter, subsequent to the taking of an appeal, but prior to a decision thereon, shall constitute a withdrawal of the appeal, and the initial decision in the case shall be final to the same extent as though no appeal had been taken.
[61 FR 18907, Apr. 29, 1996, as amended at 62 FR 10331, Mar. 6, 1997]
Notes of Decisions
Gerardo Aguilera-Ruiz v. John Ashcroft, United States Attorney General (2003)
ca9 · cites it 11×
“The BIA deemed his appeal withdrawn pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.4 , which provides: Departure from the United States of a person who is the subject of deportation proceedings subsequent to the taking of an appeal, but prior to a decision thereon, shall constitute a withdrawal of…”
Lezama-Garcia v. Holder (2011)
ca9 · cites it 8×
“2003) (upholding 8 C.F.R. § 1003.4 , which deems a departure from the United States of a person subject to depor- tation proceedings while an appeal challenging that deporta- tion is pending to constitute an automatic withdrawal of the appeal, and rejecting a Fleuti-type…”
Higinia Martinez-De Bojorquez v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General (2004)
ca9 · cites it 10×
“The Immigration-Judge (“IJ”) had concluded that Martinez’s departures from the United States while an earlier appeal had been pending with the BIA resulted in a withdrawal of that appeal pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.4 , 1 rendering Martinez’s original deportation order final.”
Madrigal v. Holder (2009)
ca6 · cites it 8×
“The Board found that because the petitioner had departed from the United States while she was subject to an order of removal and while her appeal was pending, the appeal was effectively withdrawn pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.4 . Noting that she was removed by the government and…”
Vily Long v. Alberto R. Gonzales, U.S. Attorney General (2005)
ca5 · cites it 4×
“PER CURIAM: Petitioner Vily Long appeals a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals that his departure from the United States while his appeal to the BIA was pending resulted in a withdrawal of his appeal under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.4 . Because we conclude that Long departed under…”
Coyt v. Holder (2010)
ca9 · cites it 2×
“2009), the Sixth Circuit held 8 C.F.R. § 1003.4 to be “inapplicable” where the petitioner is forcibly removed during the pendency of his appeal.”
ARMENDAREZ (2008)
bia · cites it 2×
“See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.4 (2008); see also Long v.”
DIAZ-GARCIA (2012)
bia · cites it 7×
“”1 Based on that removal, the DHS asserts that the respondent’s appeal has been withdrawn pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.4 (2012) and that we now lack jurisdiction over this matter.”
Silvano Lopez-Angel v. William Barr (2019)
ca9 · cites it 6×
“BARR SUMMARY * Immigration The panel granted Silvano Lopez-Angel’s petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals, and remanded, holding that Lopez’s removal from the United States while his appeal was pending before the BIA did not withdraw his appeal…”
Yuzi Cui v. Merrick Garland (2021)
ca9
“” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.4 (emphases added). As the BIA made no decision on appeal and explicitly “returned” the record to the IJ, the IJ’s “initial decision [was] final,” id.”
Ghassan Mansour v. Alberto Gonzales, United States Attorney General (2006)
ca6 · cites it 2×
“” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.4 . In other words, “when a person who is under a deportation order, from which he has appealed to the BIA, voluntarily leaves the United States, he has been deported, the deportation is final, and an appeal to the BIA has been withdrawn” under 8 C.”
Gualberto Chavez-Garcia v. Jefferson Sessions (2017)
ca9 · cites it 2×
“2004) (holding that a petitioner’s due process rights were violated after the IJ failed to inform the petitioner when she reserved her right to appeal that her departure from the United States during her pending appeal to the BIA would constitute a waiver of her right to appeal…”
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.