OCTOBER TERM, 2007
NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is
being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.
The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been
prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
DADA v. MUKASEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 06–1181. Argued January 7, 2008—Decided June 16, 2008
Petitioner, a native and citizen of Nigeria, alleges that he married an
American citizen in 1999. His wife filed an I–130 Petition for Alien
Relative on his behalf that was denied in 2003. The Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) charged Dada with being removable under
the Immigration and Nationality Act for overstaying his temporary
nonimmigrant visa. The Immigration Judge (IJ) denied the request
for a continuance pending adjudication of a second I–130 petition,
found Dada eligible for removal, and granted his request for volun-
tary departure under 8 U. S. C. §1229c(b). The Board of Immigration
Appeals (BIA) affirmed and ordered Dada to depart within 30 days or
suffer statutory penalties. Two days before the end of the 30-day pe-
riod, Dada sought to withdraw his voluntary departure request and
filed a motion to reopen removal proceedings under 8 U. S. C.
§1229a(c)(7), contending that new and material evidence demon-
strated a bona fide marriage and that his case should be continued
until resolution of the second I–130 petition. After the voluntary de-
parture period had expired, the BIA denied the request, reasoning
that an alien who has been granted voluntary departure but does not
depart in a timely fashion is statutorily barred from receiving ad-
justment of status. It did not consider Dada’s request to withdr