Sang Goo Park v. Attorney General of the United States
Docket: No. 09-3755
Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit; March 23, 2010; Federal Appellate Court
The petition for review by Sang Goo Park and his family has been denied. Park and his family entered the U.S. in 1999 on nonimmigrant visas, which were revoked in June 2000. Park applied for permanent residency in 2003, but his application was denied in March 2006 due to fraudulent documents. He was charged with removal in July 2006 for overstaying his visa and submitting fraudulent documents, admitting to the overstay but denying the fraud. The Immigration Judge (IJ) found the fraud charge credible and ordered his removal to South Korea. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) adopted the IJ’s decision, adding its reasoning and dismissing Park's appeal. Park, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for review, which is under the jurisdiction of 8 U.S.C. § 1252. The BIA's factual determinations are reviewed under the substantial evidence standard, and its legal decisions undergo de novo review. During the hearing, Park testified he obtained his visa through a travel agency without fully understanding the application, which he admitted contained false information regarding his employment. The IJ questioned Park's credibility, noting inconsistencies in his testimony about signing the application. The BIA highlighted that the application was bilingual and featured discrepancies regarding Park's employment that he would reasonably know about. Park's argument that he was unaware of the fraudulent information did not sufficiently challenge the BIA’s finding of willful misrepresentation, which was supported by the evidence presented. Additionally, Park's claim that the BIA and IJ failed to act on his application for adjustment of status was dismissed, as he was deemed inadmissible due to the willful misrepresentation. Park's wife and son were also found removable for overstaying their admission period, with Park's attorney acknowledging that if the fraud charge was sustained, it would prevent Park from adjusting his status based on an approved labor certification. Consequently, the petition for review was denied.