Background
Through counsel, Demetrio Urias-Gaxiola admitted in written removal pleadings that he entered the United States without inspection and conceded removability on that ground. Before his merits hearing, counsel sought to amend the pleading, asserting that Urias-Gaxiola had actually entered lawfully with a visa.
The immigration judge denied amendment without explanation and stopped counsel from developing testimony about the entry. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed and made its own assessment that the evidence would not satisfy the standard for withdrawing the admission.
The Court’s Holding
The Ninth Circuit held that the agency abused its discretion. Although an attorney’s factual concession is ordinarily binding, a noncitizen may withdraw it by establishing that it is untrue. The immigration judge therefore had to permit testimony and other evidence directed to the claimed mistake rather than treating counsel’s original filing as conclusive.
The BIA also exceeded its appellate role by deciding factual sufficiency in the first instance. The panel remanded for an evidentiary determination of whether the admission was false and, if withdrawn, whether Urias-Gaxiola remains removable on another ground. It denied other issues in a separate memorandum disposition.
Key Takeaways
- Counsel’s factual admissions in immigration court are binding by default but not irrebuttable.
- A motion identifying a concrete factual mistake requires a meaningful opportunity to present supporting evidence.
- The BIA reviews the immigration judge’s record; it may not replace missing trial-level factfinding with its own.
- Correcting the entry allegation can materially affect removability and eligibility to adjust status.
Why It Matters
Removal pleadings demand careful verification because an erroneous admission can determine both removability and access to relief. When an error is discovered, counsel should move promptly, identify the proposed evidence, and preserve any refusal to hear it. The ruling supplies an important procedural safeguard without making withdrawal automatic.
Read the full opinion (PDF) · Court docket