IIFilings, Hearings and Decisions程序经过

Requests to the government (November 2025). The firm asked ICE's legal office to exercise prosecutorial discretion and leave the asylum case with USCIS, and asked ICE field offices in New Jersey and Louisiana for release on recognizance or a low bond. ICE answered that only the Immigration Judge could decide custody.向政府提出的请求（2025年11月）。本所请求移民执法局法律办公室行使检控裁量权，将庇护案留在移民局审理，并请求新泽西及路易斯安那的执法局办公室以具结释放或低额保释金释放当事人。执法局答复称羁押问题只能由移民法官决定。

Bond motion (December 2025). The firm moved the Immigration Judge for release or a $2,500 bond under INA § 236(a), with a sponsor, tax returns and family ties. The court's electronic filing system required the bond motion and the evidence to be filed separately and in a separate bond record; the filing was refiled to meet those rules.保释动议（2025年12月）。本所依INA第236(a)条请求移民法官释放当事人或设定2,500美元保释金，并提交担保人、报税记录及家庭联系证据。法院电子系统要求保释动议与证据分开、并在单独的保释卷宗中提交，本所据此重新提交。

Bond hearing (December 18, 2025). The judge first confirmed that the new no-bond rule for people who entered without inspection, Matter of Yajure Hurtado, did not apply to a lawful entrant, so he was eligible for a bond hearing. The judge then denied bond, finding danger to the community under Matter of Rodriguez Pena, a Board precedent published the day before, which allows weight to be given to arrest charges even without a conviction, and, in the alternative, flight risk.保释听证（2025年12月18日）。法官首先确认，针对无证入境者的不得保释新规（Matter of Yajure Hurtado）不适用于合法入境者，当事人有权获得保释听证。法官随后以对社区构成危险为由拒绝保释，依据的是前一日刚发布的上诉委员会先例Matter of Rodriguez Pena，该先例允许在无定罪的情况下考虑逮捕指控；并以逃匿风险作为替代理由。

Motions to reconsider (December 2025 to January 2026). The firm moved to reconsider and, in the alternative, to reopen the bond decision, showing that the sponsor and ties evidence was already in the record and that the earlier charge had been dismissed. Reconsideration was denied on December 31, 2025, in part because evidence had been filed in the removal record rather than the bond record and because of the new motion fee imposed by 2025 legislation. A further motion was denied on January 5, 2026 as numerically barred.复议动议（2025年12月至2026年1月）。本所申请复议并替代性申请重开保释决定，指出担保人及家庭联系证据早已在卷，且此前的指控已被撤销。法院于2025年12月31日驳回复议，部分理由是证据提交在遣返卷宗而非保释卷宗，以及2025年立法新设的动议费用。2026年1月5日，另一动议以次数受限为由被驳回。

Changed-circumstances bond request and BIA appeal (January 2026). The firm filed a new bond request under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.19(e) with new sworn statements and a notarized sponsor affidavit, and appealed the bond denial to the Board. The client remained detained.情况变化的保释请求及上诉（2026年1月）。本所依8 C.F.R. § 1003.19(e)提交新的保释请求，附新的宣誓陈述及经公证的担保书，并就保释拒绝向上诉委员会上诉。当事人仍被羁押。

Asylum and continuance (January 2026). To meet the court's short deadline, the firm lodged a defensive asylum application, then moved to continue the individual hearing until after the spouse's USCIS interview. The hearing went forward on February 2, 2026.庇护及延期（2026年1月）。为满足法院的短期限，本所提交了防御性庇护申请，随后申请将大庭延至配偶的移民局面谈之后。听证仍于2026年2月2日进行。

Individual hearing (February 2, 2026). The firm renewed the continuance request and preserved its objection. When that was refused, it withdrew the court asylum application and requested pre-conclusion voluntary departure. The judge granted voluntary departure under INA § 240B(a) with a $0 bond. The client left the United States on March 4, 2026, within the time allowed, and ICE confirmed the departure.大庭（2026年2月2日）。本所再次申请延期并保留异议。延期被拒后，本所撤回在法庭的庇护申请，申请结案前自愿离境。法官依INA第240B(a)条批准自愿离境，保证金为0美元。当事人于2026年3月4日在期限内离境，移民执法局确认其已离境。