U.S.

Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board ofImmigration Appeals Office ofthe Clerk

5107 Leeslmrg Pike. S11i1e 2000 Falls Ch11rch, Virginia 22041

Garza, Martha E., Esq Garza & Associates 4545 Bissonnet, Suite 230 Bellaire, TX 77401

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - HOU 126 Northpoint Drive, Suite 2020 Houston, TX 77060

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Name: GONZALEZ VALENCIA, ERNESTO

A 088-063-861

Date of this notice: 5/14/2013

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case. Sincerely,

DorutL ct1/VL)
Donna Carr Chief Clerk

Enclosure Panel Members: Holmes, David B.

williame Userteam: Docket

Cite as: Ernesto Gonzalez-Valencia, A088 063 861 (BIA May 14, 2013)

U.S. Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review Falls Church, Virginia 22041

Decision of the Board oflmmigration Appeals

File:

A088 063 861 - Houston, TX

Date:

MAY 14 2013

In re: ERNESTO GONZALEZ-VALENCIA IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS MOTION ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF OHS: Martha E. Garza, Esquire

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Alex D. Perez Assistant Chief Counsel

APPLICATION:

Reconsideration; reopening

This matter was last before the Board on February 28, 2013, when we dismissed the respondent's appeal from the Immigration Judge's decision denying his application for adjustment of status under section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1255(i). be denied. A motion to reconsider must identify an error of fact or law in the Board's prior decision. U.S.C. 1229a(c)(6); 8 C.F.R. 1003.2(b); The respondent has filed a timely motion to reconsider and to reopen. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has filed an opposition to the motion. The motion wiJI

See section 240(c)(6) of the Act, 8

24 I&N Dec. 56 (BIA 2006).

Matter of 0-S-G-,

Although the respondent requests reconsideration, he has not

identified any error in the Board's last decision. Accordingly, reconsideration will be denied. The respondent has also not established a basis for reopening proceedings. He has submitted evidence showing that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services granted him Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Mot. Exh. B). He states that he seeks to have his removal proceedings administratively closed. However, as the DHS correctly argues, the fact that the respondent's removal is being deferred is not a basis to reopen or administratively close proceedings. Administrative closure, which is available to an Immigration Judge and the Board, is used to temporarily remove a case from an Immigration Judge's active calendar or from the Board's docket.

See Marter ofAvetisyan,

25 l&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2012). In the matter before us,

the respondent's proceedings have been completed, and closure would serve no purpose. Furthermore, the respondent has not established that he would be eligible for any other relief that could be granted if proceedings were reopened. ORDER: The respondent's motion is denied.

FOR THE BOARD

Cite as: Ernesto Gonzalez-Valencia, A088 063 861 (BIA May 14, 2013)