C.F.R. » Title 8 » CHAPTER I—DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY › SUBCHAPTER B—IMMIGRATION REGULATIONS › PART 292—REPRESENTATION AND APPEARANCES

8 C.F.R. § 292.2

Organizations qualified for recognition; requests for recognition; withdrawal of recognition; accreditation of representatives; roster

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

(a) Qualifications of organizations. A non-profit religious, charitable, social service, or similar organization established in the United States and recognized as such by the Board may designate a representative or representatives to practice before the Service alone or the Service and the Board (including practice before the Immigration Court). Such organization must establish to the satisfaction of the Board that:

(1) It makes only nominal charges and assesses no excessive membership dues for persons given assistance; and

(2) It has at its disposal adequate knowledge, information and experience.

(b) Requests for recognition. An organization having the qualifications prescribed in paragraph (a) of this section may file an application for recognition on a Form G-27 directly with the Board, along with proof of service of a copy of the application on the district director having jurisdiction over the area in which the organization is located. The district director, within 30 days from the date of service, shall forward to the Board a recommendation for approval or disapproval of the application and the reasons therefor, or request a specified period of time in which to conduct an investigation or otherwise obtain relevant information regarding the applicant. The district director shall include proof of service of a copy of such recommendation or request on the organization. The organization shall have 30 days in which to file a response with the Board to a recommendation by a district director that is other than favorable, along with proof of service of a copy of such response on the district director. If the Board approves a request for time to conduct an investigation, or in its discretion remands the application to the district director for further information, the organization shall be advised of the time granted for such purpose. The Service shall promptly forward the results of any investigation or inquiry to the Board, along with its recommendations for approval or disapproval and the reasons therefor, and proof of service of a copy of the submission on the organization. The organization shall have 30 days from the date of such service to file a response with the Board to any matters raised therein, with proof of service of a copy of the response on the district director. Requests for extensions of filing times must be submitted in writing with the reasons therefor and may be granted by the Board in its discretion. Oral argument may be heard before the Board in its discretion at such date and time as the Board may direct. The organization and Service shall be informed by the Board of the action taken regarding an application. Any recognized organization shall promptly notify the Board of any changes in its name, address, or public telephone number.

(c) Withdrawal of recognition. The Board may withdraw the recognition of any organization which has failed to maintain the qualifications required by § 292.2(a). Withdrawal of recognition may be accomplished in accordance with the following procedure:

(1) The Service, by the district director within whose jurisdiction the organization is located, may conduct an investigation into any organization it believes no longer meets the standards for recognition.

(2) If the investigation establishes to the satisfaction of the district director that withdrawal proceedings should be instituted, he shall cause a written statement of the grounds upon which withdrawal is sought to be served upon the organization, with notice to show cause why its recognition should not be withdrawn. The notice will call upon the organization to appear before a special inquiry officer for a hearing at a time and place stated, not less than 30 days after service of the notice.

(3) The special inquiry officer shall hold a hearing, receive evidence, make findings of fact, state his recommendations, and forward the complete record to the Board.

(4) The organization and the Service shall have the opportunity of appearing at oral argument before the Board at a time specified by the Board.

(5) The Board shall consider the entire record and render its decision. The order of the Board shall constitute the final disposition of the proceedings.

(d) Accreditation of representatives. An organization recognized by the Board under paragraph (b) of this section may apply for accreditation of persons of good moral character as its representatives. An organization may apply to have a representative accredited to practice before the Service alone or the Service and the Board (including practice before immigration judges). An application for accreditation shall fully set forth the nature and extent of the proposed representative's experience and knowledge of immigration and naturalization law and procedure and the category of accreditation sought. No individual may submit an application on his or her own behalf. An application shall be filed directly with the Board, along with proof of service of a copy of the application on the district director having jurisdiction over the area in which the requesting organization is located. The district director, within 30 days from the date of service, shall forward to the Board a recommendation for approval or disapproval of the application and the reasons therefor, or request a specified period of time in which to conduct an investigation or otherwise obtain relevant information regarding the applicant. The district director shall include proof of service of a copy of such recommendation or request on the organization. The organization shall have 30 days in which to file a response with the Board to a recommendation by a district director that is other than favorable, with proof of service of a copy of such response on the district director. If the Board approves a request for time to conduct an investigation, or in its discretion remands the application to the district director for further information, the organization shall be advised of the time granted for such purpose. The district director shall promptly forward the results of any investigation or inquiry to the Board, along with a recommendation for approval or disapproval and the reasons therefor, and proof of service of a copy of the submission on the organization. The organization shall have 30 days from the date of service to file a response with the Board to any matters raised therein, with proof or service of a copy of the response on the district director. Requests for extensions of filing times must be submitted in writing with the reasons therefor and may be granted by the Board in its discretion. Oral argument may be heard before the Board in its discretion at such date and time as the Board may direct. The Board may approve or disapprove an application in whole or in part and shall inform the organization and the district director of the action taken with regard to an application. The accreditation of a representative shall be valid for a period of three years only; however, the accreditation shall remain valid pending Board consideration of an application for renewal of accreditation if the application is filed at least 60 days before the third anniversary of the date of the Board's prior accreditation of the representative. Accreditation terminates when the Board's recognition of the organization ceases for any reason or when the representative's employment or other connection with the organization ceases. The organization shall promptly notify the Board of such changes.

(e) Roster. The Board shall maintain an alphabetical roster of recognized organizations and their accredited representatives. A copy of the roster shall be furnished to the Commissioner and he shall be advised from time to time of changes therein.

[40 FR 23272, May 29, 1975, as amended at 49 FR 44086, Nov. 2, 1984; 62 FR 9075, Feb. 28, 1997]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22 cases, 1975–2011 · leading case: Baptist Educ. Ctr., 20 I. & N. Dec. 723 (BIA 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Baptist Educ. Ctr., 20 I. & N. Dec. 723 (BIA 1993). · cites it 18× “2(c) (1993) to withdraw recognition of an organization authorized to practice before the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Board of Immigration Appeals, an organization seeking to retain its status as a recognized organization must demonstrate by clear, unequivocal,…”
Jean Patrick Michel v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 206 F.3d 253 (2d Cir. 2000). · cites it 2× “§ 1229a(b)(4)(A); 8 C.F.R. § 292.2 (d) (1999). . The INS also contends that, even if the BIA did not properly decide the case, we should nonetheless affirm because Michel has been convicted of an “aggravated felony” and is therefore deportable based on that offense.”
Rafeal Ramirez-Durazo, Rosa Isela Lopez De Ramirez, Luz Maria Ramirez-Alcaraz, Maria Sara Ramirez-Alcaraz v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 794 F.2d 491 (9th Cir. 1986). “8 C.F.R. § 292.2 (d). The petitioners were represented by such an accredited representative.”
State Ex Rel. Indiana State Bar Ass'n v. Diaz, 838 N.E.2d 433 (Ind. 2005). · cites it 2× “8 C.F.R. § 292.2 (a) (2005). Second, the organization must petition on behalf of the individual, including in its application detailed information on the individual's "experience and knowledge of immigration and naturalization law and procedure _.”
United States v. Jermi Francisco Lopez, 445 F.3d 90 (2d Cir. 2006). “While Lopez proceeded pro se before the IJ, he was represented on his appeal to the BIA by Reverend Robert Vitaglione, a non-attorney representative accredited pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 292.2 (a). . We are unpersuaded by our dissenting colleague’s assertion that Copeland and the…”
Florida Rural Legal Servs., 20 I. & N. Dec. 639 (BIA 1993). · cites it 5× “, an organization recognized by the Board of Immigration Appeals under 8 C.F.R. § 292.2 (a) (1992), requesting the accreditation of Jackson M.”
Lutheran Ministriesof Florida, 20 I. & N. Dec. 185 (BIA 1990). · cites it 6× “Interim Decision #3132 MATTER OF LUTHERAN MINISTRIES OF FLORIDA Request for Recognition Decided by Board February 27, 1990 The application of a nonprofit organization seeking recognition under 8 C.F.R. § 292.2 (a) (1989) should include detailed information as to how the…”
Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Brisbon, 31 A.3d 110 (Md. 2011). “1 (a)(4), which is “a non-profit religious, charitable, social service or similar organization established in the United States and recognized as such by the Board [of Immigration Appeals],” 8 C.F.R. § 292.2 (a). The Respondent did not qualify as an accredited or authorized…”
Haitian Refugee Ctr. v. Civiletti, 503 F. Supp. 442 (S.D. Fla. 1980). “Finally, the defendants allege that the HRC had not been authorized to solicit clients because it had not qualified as a non-profit organization under 8 C.F.R. § 292.2 . While this court has serious reservations about the applicability of that regulation to the circumstances of…”
Chaplain Servs., 21 I. & N. Dec. 578 (BIA 1996). · cites it 7× “, requesting recognition by this Board pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 292.2 (1995). The application will be disapproved.”
Orantes-Hernandez v. Meese, 685 F. Supp. 1488 (C.D. Cal. 1988). “ÍNS violates its own operating instructions by failing to enforce the requirement that misconduct of INS employees be reported to supervisory personnel or the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR).”
Al Roumy v. Mukasey, 290 F. App'x 856 (6th Cir. 2008). “” 8 C.F.R. § 292.2 . 3 . The government also claims that there is no constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel in immigration proceedings since such proceedings are civil matters for which there is no right to appointed counsel.”
Show all 22 citing cases →
— 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(a) — 2 cases
Koden, 15 I. & N. Dec. 739 (BIA 1976).
Bogart, 15 I. & N. Dec. 552 (BIA 1975).
— 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(a)(11) — 1 case
De Anda, 17 I. & N. Dec. 54 (BIA 1979).
— 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(b) — 1 case
Koden, 15 I. & N. Dec. 739 (BIA 1976).
— 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(c)(2) — 1 case
Baptist Educ. Ctr., 20 I. & N. Dec. 723 (BIA 1993). “2(c) (1993) to withdraw recognition of an organization authorized to practice before the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Board of Immigration Appeals, an organization seeking to retain its status as a recognized organization must demonstrate by clear, unequivocal,…”
— 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(d) — 1 case
Jean Patrick Michel v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 206 F.3d 253 (2d Cir. 2000). “§ 1229a(b)(4)(A); 8 C.F.R. § 292.2 (d) (1999). . The INS also contends that, even if the BIA did not properly decide the case, we should nonetheless affirm because Michel has been convicted of an “aggravated felony” and is therefore deportable based on that offense.”
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.