Published on:

U.S. Immigration Policy: A Case of Continuances

orderStrict regulations regarding immigration policies are largely a product of contemporary attitudes towards political identity. For the most part, the immigration policies that a country possesses are a reflection of its attitude regarding possible instances of immigration. The set of conditions that form the body of the United State’s immigration policies can be challenging for undocumented immigrants who attempt to secure permanent resident status. The case of Mogeni serves as a stark reminder of the difficulties posed by the country’s immigration policies to undocumented immigrants who attempt to acquire a permanent form of residence.

Mogeni is a Kenyan citizen. In 2002, Mogeni entered the United States as a non – immigrant visitor. In 2003, Mogeni decided to enter into a marriage with a U.S. Citizen named Byers. Byers and Mogeni attempted to resolve the latter’s immigrant status by filing an I – 30 petition for Alien Relative. The Department of Homeland Security denied the petition that was filed by the couple. The DHS maintained that Mogeni and Byers’ union was a sham. The conclusion of their proceedings with the DHS dissuaded Mogeni and Byers from pursuing an appeal.

The union between Byers and Mogeni ended in divorce in 2004. Mogeni then entered into another marriage with Gullie, also a U.S. citizen. Mogeni’s second marriage occurred in 2005, three months after his marriage with Byers ended. Mogeni and Gullie also attempted to file an I – 30 petition. The DHS denied Mogeni’s second attempt. The DHS brought up Mogeni’s case with his ex – wife citing that he previously tried to obtain an immigration benefit by entering into a sham marriage with Byers.

This time, Mogeni decided to file an appeal. Mogeni’s daughter from a previous marriage in Kenya, Gatere, also filed an I – 30 petition on Mogeni’s behalf. In 2006, the DHS decided to initiate removal proceedings against Mogeni. Mogeni appeared with his legal counsel during the scheduled hearing. Mogeni’s party requested for a continuance and the request was granted. From 2007 to 2012, Mogeni was able to obtain 12 continuances from an immigration judge. Mogeni’s luck ran out when he filed for his 13th request for a continuance. The immigration judge rejected Mogeni’s request and ordered the former’s removal. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the immigration judge’s ruling.

If you or someone you know needs legal counsel regarding immigration issues, please contact the immigration attorneys at Lyttle Law Firm in Austin, Texas by visiting our website or calling us today at 512-215-5225.