Our Cases



Our office has received many favorable decisions for clients in court. For reference and research, some of those decisions are provided below.

DISCLAIMER: The decisions made available here are provided solely for reference and research purposes. Previous successes are no way indiciative of future results, even on factually or legally identical matters. The Law Office of Joshua Bardavid, Esq. makes no assurances, guarantees or other representations about the outcome of any future matters. The cases made available are not exhaustive of cases handled by Joshua Bardavid.

Summary

Case number 04-1441 Download here: PDF , View online HERE

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals faulted an Immigration Judge for suggesting "that any asylum applicant who has been persecuted (other than on the basis of an immutable characteristic) should simply abandon the opinion or association giving rise to the persecution...." The Court found this to be "a suggestion plainly at odds with the objectives of United States asylum law."

Case number 00-4136 Download here: PDF , View online HERE

Ruling in favor of a victim of persecution on account of his Catholic religious practices, the Second Circuit held that "[b]ecause the BIA did not consider [applicant]'s testimony that he had been beaten, its decision is fatally flawed .... "

Case number 03-40333 Download here: PDF , View online HERE

Reversing the Immigration Judge, the Second Circuit held that "when a petitioner challenges the accuracy of the contents of his I-589 application that was signed under penalty of perjury, the IJ must evaluate the petitioner’s explanations and determine whether the presumption of 8 C.F.R. § 208.3(c)(2) has been rebutted."

The court also held that it "must not accept an IJ’s clear misinterpretation of testimony," and that an IJ "has an affirmative obligation to develop the record." 

Case number 03-4575 Download here: PDF , View online HERE

The Third Circuit remanded a case back to the district court of a man who had been detained by the government for over four-years without case. In so doing, the Court noted that "the fact that [the Petitioner] has been detained for nearly four years has garnered the attention of various individuals and institutions, at least one of which will serve as his sponsor, should he be released–Christ House, a residence in the Bronx for victims of torture and for those seeking political asylum. Thus, [the applicant] comes before us with his identity established, a number of contacts in the community, and a proposed residence and address in the area. And, as discussed above, it surely does not appear reasonably foreseeable that removal is likely, at least any time soon." 

Case number 3:02-cv-2204 (Conn. D.C.) Download here: PDF , View online HERE

The U.S. District Court for Connecticut agreed with our assertion that the failure to adjudicate an application for adjustment of status can amount to a violation of an applicant's rights under law. Thus, the Court issued an order requiring the government to properly adjudicate that application.


Case number 03-2972 Download here: PDF , View online HERE

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that the Board of Immigration Appeals was required to apply the proper legal standard to a motion to reopen, i.e., the "prima facie" standard. The evidence presented to the Board established "as a matter of law" that a Chinese asylum applicant with U.S.-born citizen children met the prima facie standard when claiming a fear of persecution on account of China's one-child family planning policy.


Case number 05-2638 Download here: PDF , View online HERE

The Court faulted an Immigration Judge for relying upon "speculative, trifling" and other peripheral issues in denying an applicant's claim for asylum. Thus, the Court remanded the matter back to the Judge for reconsideration.


Case number 99-4148 Download here: PDF , View online HERE

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Board's failure to consider "properly presented" legal arguments constituted reversible error.


Case number 03-40687 Download here: PDF , View online HERE

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that "an agency decision is incomplete in its analysis of an asylum applicant’s well-founded fear if it does not examine evidence of country conditions in the record, especially when it credits an applicant’s testimony that he or she possesses characteristics encompassed by one or more of the five protected grounds."


Case number 03-3746 and 04-1364 Download here: PDF , View online HERE

Favorable decision relating to motions to reopen.


Case number 03-2111p Download here: PDF , View online HERE

Judge Samuel Alito, then with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (now Justice Alito of the Supreme Court) found that the Court "cannot sustain the exclusion of the documents without an explanation of the basis for the ruling." Further, Judge McKee wrote a separate opinion noting that the Immigration Judge's decision sounded like “a progression of flawed sound bites that gives the impression that [the IJ] was looking for ways to deny [the applicant]’s claim, rather than adjudicate it." (internal quotations omitted).