Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 903 views

    Matter of Paul Wilson DORMAN, Respondent: Decided by Attorney General May 5, 2011

    Uploaded by

    towleroad
    The Attorney General vacated the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals regarding a respondent's eligibility for cancellation of removal. The Attorney General remanded the case back to the Board of Immigration Appeals to make specific findings regarding whether the respondent's same-sex partnership qualified him as a spouse under New Jersey law and immigration law absent the Defense of Marriage Act, as well as the timing of the civil union and whether the respondent could satisfy the requirements for cancellation of removal if considered a spouse.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Matter of Paul Wilson DORMAN, Respondent: Decided by Attorney General May 5, 2011

    Uploaded by

    towleroad
    903 views1 page
    The Attorney General vacated the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals regarding a respondent's eligibility for cancellation of removal. The Attorney General remanded the case back to the Board of Immigration Appeals to make specific findings regarding whether the respondent's same-sex partnership qualified him as a spouse under New Jersey law and immigration law absent the Defense of Marriage Act, as well as the timing of the civil union and whether the respondent could satisfy the requirements for cancellation of removal if considered a spouse.

    Original Title

    3712

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Attorney General vacated the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals regarding a respondent's eligibility for cancellation of removal. The Attorney General remanded the case back to the Board of Immigration Appeals to make specific findings regarding whether the respondent's same-sex partnership qualified him as a spouse under New Jersey law and immigration law absent the Defense of Marriage Act, as well as the timing of the civil union and whether the respondent could satisfy the requirements for cancellation of removal if considered a spouse.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    903 views1 page

    Matter of Paul Wilson DORMAN, Respondent: Decided by Attorney General May 5, 2011

    Uploaded by

    towleroad
    The Attorney General vacated the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals regarding a respondent's eligibility for cancellation of removal. The Attorney General remanded the case back to the Board of Immigration Appeals to make specific findings regarding whether the respondent's same-sex partnership qualified him as a spouse under New Jersey law and immigration law absent the Defense of Marriage Act, as well as the timing of the civil union and whether the respondent could satisfy the requirements for cancellation of removal if considered a spouse.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    Cite as 25 I&N Dec. 485 (A.G.

    2011) Interim Decision #3712

    Matter of Paul Wilson DORMAN, Respondent

    Decided by Attorney General May 5, 2011

    U.S. Department of Justice


    Office of the Attorney General

    The Attorney General vacated the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals and
    remanded for the Board to make specific findings with regard to the respondent’s eligibility
    for cancellation of removal.

    BEFORE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL


    Pursuant to my authority set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(h)(1)(i), I order that
    the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) in this case
    applying Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”), 1 U.S.C. § 7,
    be vacated, and that this matter be referred to me for review.

    In the exercise of my review authority under that regulation, and


    upon consideration of the record in this case, I direct that the order of the
    Board be vacated and that this matter be remanded to the Board to make
    such findings as may be necessary to determine whether and how the
    constitutionality of DOMA is presented in this case, including, but not limited
    to: 1) whether respondent’s same-sex partnership or civil union qualifies him
    to be considered a “spouse” under New Jersey law; 2) whether, absent the
    requirements of DOMA, respondent’s same-sex partnership or civil union
    would qualify him to be considered a “spouse” under the Immigration and
    Nationality Act; 3) what, if any, impact the timing of respondent’s civil union
    should have on his request for that discretionary relief; and 4) whether,
    if he had a “qualifying relative,” the respondent would be able to satisfy the
    exceptional and unusual hardship requirement for cancellation of removal.

    485

    You might also like