Bariso v. Holder
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Danilo Basmayor Bariso, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for re[541] view of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“I J”) decision denying Bariso’s application for a waiver of inadmissibility under section 237(a)(1)(H) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(H). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 to review the statutory eligibility elements of a waiver of inadmissibility under section 237(a)(1)(H). See San Pedro v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1156, 1157 (9th Cir.2005). We review de novo questions of law, Cabrera-Alvarez v. Gonzales, 423 F.3d 1006, 1009 (9th Cir.2005), and we deny the petition for review.
The IJ correctly concluded that Bariso was ineligible for a waiver of inadmissibility because he did not have a qualifying relative at the time of the IJ’s decision. See Kalezic v. INS, 647 F.2d 920, 922 (9th Cir.1981) (“[T]he critical date in applying [section 237(a)(1)(H) ] is the date of the Immigration Judge’s decision.”). Bariso’s contention that his sisters should be considered qualifying relatives is not persuasive.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
328 F. App'x 540 (Bariso v. Holder) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.