When new evidence emerges or circumstances change after a final order, a motion to reopen may provide a critical second chance. Our attorneys prepare compelling motions that present material new evidence and demonstrate changed circumstances to secure reopening of your immigration case.
A motion to reopen is a procedural mechanism under INA §240(c)(7) that allows a respondent to request that an immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) reopen a completed case based on new facts or evidence that was not available at the time of the original hearing. Unlike a motion to reconsider, which asks the adjudicator to re-examine the existing record for legal or factual errors, a motion to reopen introduces material new evidence and asks the court to consider the case anew. At Mandi Law Group, our immigration attorneys in Albany and the Capital District have extensive experience preparing and filing motions to reopen before immigration courts and the BIA.
The statutory framework imposes strict time and number limitations on motions to reopen. Generally, a motion must be filed within 90 days of the date of the final administrative order of removal, and a party is limited to filing one motion to reopen. These restrictions reflect the strong public interest in the finality of immigration proceedings. However, the statute and case law recognize several critical exceptions that allow motions to be filed outside these limitations, including motions based on changed country conditions, motions to rescind in absentia orders, and joint motions filed with the agreement of the Department of Homeland Security.
Several important exceptions to the time and number limitations exist. A motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel may qualify for equitable tolling of the 90-day deadline when the movant exercised due diligence but was prevented from timely filing due to the prior attorney's failures. Changed country conditions motions under INA §240(c)(7)(C)(ii) are exempt from both the 90-day deadline and the one-motion limit in asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture cases. The BIA and immigration judges also retain sua sponte authority to reopen cases in exceptional circumstances without regard to time or number limitations.
Joint motions to reopen filed with the consent of both the respondent and the Department of Homeland Security (through Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE) are not subject to the time and number limitations. These motions are commonly used when DHS agrees that reopening is warranted — for example, when the respondent has become eligible for relief through a subsequently approved visa petition or when both parties agree that the original proceedings were flawed. Our attorneys negotiate with ICE trial attorneys when appropriate to pursue joint motions that expedite the reopening process.
A motion to reopen must generally be filed within 90 days of the final order. However, exceptions exist for changed country conditions (no time limit), in absentia orders (180 days or no limit for lack of notice), and joint motions with DHS. Every day matters — if you believe you have grounds to reopen your case, consult with an attorney immediately.
(518) 698-0347Our motion to reopen practice covers every basis for reopening immigration proceedings, from newly discovered evidence to changed country conditions and ineffective assistance of prior counsel.
A motion to reopen based on new evidence under INA §240(c)(7) requires the movant to present material evidence that was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at the original hearing. Our attorneys in Albany carefully evaluate whether newly discovered evidence meets this statutory threshold, draft detailed affidavits explaining why the evidence was previously unavailable, and present the new material in a manner that demonstrates it would likely change the outcome of the case. We handle motions before both immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals, ensuring that each filing complies with the applicable procedural requirements and deadlines.
Motions to reopen based on changed country conditions are exempt from both the 90-day filing deadline and the one-motion numerical limit under INA §240(c)(7)(C)(ii). These motions are available in asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture cases when conditions in the applicant’s home country have materially changed since the original hearing. Our attorneys compile comprehensive country conditions evidence from the U.S. State Department, reputable human rights organizations, news sources, and expert declarations to demonstrate that changed circumstances warrant reopening. We present a prima facie case for relief that justifies a new hearing on the merits.
When a respondent’s prior attorney provided constitutionally deficient representation that prejudiced the outcome of the case, a motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel may be filed. Under the framework established in Matter of Lozada, 19 I&N Dec. 637 (BIA 1988), the movant must satisfy specific procedural requirements: filing a detailed affidavit describing the prior attorney’s failings, notifying the prior attorney of the allegations and providing an opportunity to respond, and filing a complaint with the appropriate disciplinary authority. Our attorneys guide clients through every Lozada requirement, document the deficient performance and resulting prejudice, and present compelling arguments for reopening.
Immigration judges and the BIA retain the authority to reopen proceedings sua sponte — on their own motion — in exceptional circumstances. While this authority is discretionary and not subject to the usual time and number limitations, it is exercised sparingly and only when exceptional situations warrant reopening in the interest of justice. Our attorneys identify cases where sua sponte reopening may be appropriate, such as when a prior order was entered based on fraud by a third party, when there has been a significant change in law, or when manifest injustice would result from enforcing a final order. We craft persuasive requests that demonstrate why the exceptional circumstances standard is met.
Our structured approach ensures that every motion to reopen is thoroughly evaluated, meticulously documented, and persuasively presented to the adjudicating body.
We begin with a comprehensive evaluation of your case history, the prior proceedings, the basis for the original decision, and the grounds for reopening. We analyze whether you have new evidence that was previously unavailable, whether country conditions have materially changed, whether prior counsel was ineffective, or whether other exceptional circumstances justify reopening. This evaluation determines the strongest legal basis for your motion.
Our attorneys assemble a thorough evidence package to support your motion. This may include newly discovered documents, updated country conditions reports, expert declarations, medical or psychological evaluations, affidavits from witnesses, and documentation of prior counsel’s deficiencies. Every piece of evidence is organized and presented to demonstrate that reopening is warranted and that a prima facie case for relief exists.
We prepare and file the motion to reopen with the appropriate adjudicator — whether an immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals — ensuring compliance with all procedural requirements, filing deadlines, and service obligations. The motion includes a detailed legal brief that cites applicable statutes, regulations, and case law, and presents a compelling argument for why reopening is justified.
After filing, we advocate for your motion through the adjudication process. If the immigration court schedules oral argument, we present your case persuasively before the judge. If the motion is filed with the BIA, we monitor the case and respond promptly to any requests for additional briefing or evidence. If the motion is granted, we represent you in the reopened proceedings to pursue the underlying relief.
Reopening Immigration Cases With Compelling New Evidence
Strategic advocacy for motions to reopen in Albany and the Capital District
Motions to reopen involve strict procedural requirements and demanding evidentiary standards. Understanding these key considerations before filing helps protect your rights and strengthens your motion.
Under INA §240(c)(7)(C)(i), a motion to reopen must generally be filed within 90 days of the date of the final administrative order of removal. Additionally, a party may file only one motion to reopen. These limitations are strictly enforced, and failing to comply will result in denial of the motion. However, several important exceptions exist — including motions based on changed country conditions, in absentia orders, and joint motions with DHS — that are not subject to these restrictions.
A motion to reopen is not simply a request for a second hearing. The movant must demonstrate that the new evidence or changed circumstances establish a prima facie case for the underlying relief sought — such as asylum, cancellation of removal, or adjustment of status. This means you must show that if the proceedings were reopened and the new evidence considered, you would likely be eligible for the relief. Without a prima facie showing, the motion will be denied regardless of the strength of the new evidence.
If you were ordered removed in absentia — meaning you did not appear at your hearing — you may file a motion to reopen within 180 days of the order if you can demonstrate that your failure to appear was due to exceptional circumstances beyond your control. Alternatively, you may file at any time if you demonstrate that you did not receive proper notice of the hearing or if you were in federal or state custody and your failure to appear was through no fault of your own. These motions are governed by INA §240(b)(5)(C).
In certain circumstances, the 90-day filing deadline may be equitably tolled. Courts have recognized equitable tolling when the movant exercised due diligence but was prevented from timely filing by extraordinary circumstances — such as fraud by prior counsel, mental incapacity, or other factors beyond the movant’s control. Additionally, joint motions filed with the agreement of DHS (ICE) are not subject to the time and number limitations. Our attorneys carefully evaluate whether any tolling or equitable exception applies to your case.
Answers to frequently asked questions about motions to reopen immigration cases. Every situation is unique — consult with our attorneys for guidance specific to your case.
A motion to reopen is a request to the immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to reopen a completed case based on new facts or evidence that was not available at the time of the original hearing. Under INA §240(c)(7), the motion must be supported by material evidence that was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at the former hearing. If granted, the case is reopened and the respondent has the opportunity to present the new evidence and pursue relief from removal.
Generally, a motion to reopen must be filed within 90 days of the date of the final administrative order. Additionally, a party is limited to filing one motion to reopen. However, there are important exceptions to both the time limit and the numerical limit. Motions based on changed country conditions in asylum cases have no time or number limit. Motions to reopen in absentia orders may be filed within 180 days (for exceptional circumstances) or at any time (for lack of notice). Joint motions with DHS are also exempt from these limitations.
New evidence must be material — meaning it is relevant to the claim and could affect the outcome of the case — and it must not have been available or discoverable at the time of the original hearing. Examples include newly obtained documents from the applicant’s home country, updated medical or psychological evaluations, evidence of changed personal circumstances, witness statements that were previously unavailable, and documentary evidence that was inaccessible due to conditions in the home country. The motion must include an explanation of why the evidence was not previously available.
Yes. Under INA §240(c)(7)(C)(ii), there is no time or numerical limitation on motions to reopen based on changed country conditions in asylum, withholding of removal, or Convention Against Torture cases. The motion must be supported by evidence of material changes in conditions in the applicant’s country of nationality or last habitual residence that affect the applicant’s eligibility for protection. This evidence typically includes updated State Department reports, human rights organization reports, news articles, and expert declarations.
Under Matter of Lozada, 19 I&N Dec. 637 (BIA 1988), a motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel must satisfy three procedural requirements: (1) the motion must be supported by a detailed affidavit from the respondent describing the agreement with the prior attorney, the prior attorney’s failings, and the resulting prejudice; (2) the prior attorney must be notified of the allegations and given an opportunity to respond; and (3) a complaint must be filed with the appropriate disciplinary authority if the prior attorney’s conduct constituted a violation of ethical or legal obligations. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in denial of the motion.
If the motion to reopen is granted, the immigration case is reopened and the respondent is placed back into proceedings before an immigration judge. The respondent then has the opportunity to present the new evidence, apply for relief from removal (such as asylum, cancellation of removal, or adjustment of status), and have the case adjudicated on the merits with the new evidence considered. The case proceeds as if the original proceedings had not concluded, though the scope of the reopened proceedings may be limited to the new evidence or changed circumstances that formed the basis of the motion.
Yes. If you were ordered removed in absentia — because you did not appear at your hearing — you may file a motion to reopen under INA §240(b)(5)(C). You may file within 180 days of the order if you can demonstrate that your failure to appear was due to exceptional circumstances beyond your control, such as serious illness, a death in the family, or ineffective assistance of counsel. Alternatively, you may file at any time if you can demonstrate that you did not receive proper notice of the hearing or that you were in federal or state custody and your failure to appear was through no fault of your own.
A motion to reopen is based on new facts or evidence that was not available at the time of the original hearing, while a motion to reconsider is based on errors of law or fact in the prior decision. A motion to reopen requires the presentation of material, previously unavailable evidence and must generally be filed within 90 days. A motion to reconsider asks the adjudicator to re-examine the decision based on the existing record and must generally be filed within 30 days. The legal standards, deadlines, and strategic considerations for each motion are distinct, and filing the wrong type of motion can result in denial.
Our immigration appeals practice covers the full spectrum of appellate and post-decision remedies in immigration proceedings.
Whether you have newly discovered evidence, changed country conditions, a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, or other grounds for reopening, our experienced immigration attorneys in Albany and the Capital District are here to evaluate your case and fight for a second chance. Every consultation is confidential and without obligation.