Moción para rescindir o cierre administrativo: ¿cuál es la diferencia?

Angelica Rice • March 9, 2023

Click here to read this article in Portuguese and English

      El sistema de tribunales de inmigración de los Estados Unidos actualmente está abrumado con cientos de miles de casos de inmigración que aún no se han adjudicado. En un esfuerzo por manejar este volumen de casos y eliminar algunos de sus casos atrasados, el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS, por sus siglas en inglés) y el Tribunal han flexibilizado sus políticas sobre la terminación y el cierre administrativo de ciertos tipos de casos que han considerado no ser casos prioritarios de ejecución. ¿Entonces, qué significa esto? ¿Cuál es la diferencia entre cerrar administrativamente un caso y terminar un caso? ¿Es esto algo que desea perseguir en su caso? Continúa leyendo para averiguarlo.

Cierre Administrativo


    El cierre administrativo es una herramienta de gestión de expedientes judiciales que se utiliza para pausar temporalmente los procedimientos de deportación. Asunto de W-Y-U-, 27 I&N 17 de diciembre de 18 (BIA 2017). El “cierre administrativo” de un caso elimina temporalmente el caso del calendario activo del juez de inmigración y lo pone en espera hasta que el Departamento o el abogado del demandado haga una moción para “reprogramar” el caso. Para que se cierre la administración de su caso, el Departamento debe estar de acuerdo con el cierre administrativo.


    Los jueces de inmigración pueden cerrar casos administrativamente por una variedad de razones, una de las más comunes es cuando se trata de un caso de baja prioridad o “sin prioridad de ejecución” y el Departamento no desea proseguir con la adjudicación del caso en este momento. Otra razón común para el cierre administrativo es cuando un Demandado tiene otro recurso pendiente con la USCIS, y la decisión sobre ese otro recurso afectaría el caso del Tribunal del Demandado. Por ejemplo, si un demandado tiene una petición I-130 actualmente pendiente con la USCIS pero también está en un proceso de inmigración, el juez puede acordar cerrar administrativamente el caso del demandado para esperar la decisión de USCIS sobre el I-130. Lo que significa que no se programarán audiencias futuras en el caso del Demandado hasta que el Departamento o el abogado del Demandado tomen medidas para volver a colocar el caso en el expediente activo del Tribunal. Si se aprueba el I-130, el demandado puede solicitar que se vuelva a programar su caso y solicitar que su caso judicial sea finalmente desestimado. Si bien su caso está cerrado administrativamente, en ciertas circunstancias, aún puede solicitar un permiso de trabajo.

Terminación de Procedimientos


    Si considera que su caso no debería presentarse ante el Tribunal de Inmigración en absoluto, ya sea porque ya se le ha otorgado otra solución o porque no se le colocó correctamente en los procedimientos o por alguna otra razón, el Demandado o su Abogado pueden presentar una Moción solicitando que su caso sea desestimado.


    La desestimación de los procedimientos significa que ya no tiene un caso con el Tribunal de Inmigración. Según las políticas actuales del DHS y del Tribunal, se alienta al Departamento a ejercer su discreción procesal y aceptar desestimar los casos que no son prioridades de ejecución; lo que significa que el demandado no es una amenaza para la seguridad nacional, no tiene antecedentes penales o ingresó a los Estados Unidos antes de noviembre de 2020. Sin embargo, si su caso judicial es desestimado y usted no es elegible para ningún otro remedio y/o no puede solicitar alivio con la USCIS, entonces no podrá obtener un permiso de trabajo y simplemente estará en los Estados Unidos sin estatus y sin beneficios de inmigración. Es por esta razón que a veces el Demandado opta por no solicitar la rescisión y desea seguir adelante con su caso en el Tribunal.   


      Determinar si alguna de estas opciones es adecuada para usted puede ser complicado. Debe consultar a uno de nuestros abogados de inmigración calificados para determinar si el cierre administrativo o la terminación son adecuados para usted y su caso.



Este blog no pretende ser una asesoría legal y nada aquí debe interpretarse como el establecimiento de una relación abogado-cliente. Programe una consulta con un abogado de inmigración antes de actuar sobre cualquier información que lea aquí.


Similar Posts

By Angelica Rice August 11, 2022
The United States Immigration Court system is currently overwhelmed with hundreds of thousands of immigration cases that have yet to be adjudicated. In an effort to handle this volume of cases and clear out some of their backlogged cases, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Court, have relaxed their policies on terminating and administratively closing certain kinds of cases that they have deemed not to be enforcement priority cases. So, what does this mean? What is the difference between administratively closing a case or terminating a case? Is this something you want to pursue in your case? Keep reading to find out.
By Angelica Rice May 20, 2022
Many undocumented immigrants, or immigrants without status, wonder if they are able to get a United States driver’s license. Some states allow for this, while many states still do not, so whether or not you are able to get a driver's license without evidence of status depends on where you live. See below a brief guide to obtaining a non-immigrant driver’s license in the United States.
By Shirin Navabi June 12, 2025
The United States has long been a destination for the world’s most talented athletes—not only to compete at the highest level, but to access world-class training, coaching opportunities, and long-term career prospects. Whether on the field, in the ring, or across the chessboard, athletes from across the globe are finding immigration pathways that allow them to pursue their athletic and professional goals in the U.S. U.S. immigration law offers several visa and green card options designed specifically for individuals with extraordinary athletic talent. These include the P-1A visa for internationally recognized athletes, the O-1A visa for individuals of extraordinary ability, and the EB-1A immigrant petition, which can lead to permanent residency and ultimately, U.S. citizenship. The P-1A visa is commonly used by professional athletes coming to the U.S. to compete in a specific event or season. This applies not only to individual athletes but also to members of teams or clubs recognized internationally. It is widely used by soccer players, basketball players, MMA fighters, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu competitors, and even elite chess players. Athletes must demonstrate a high level of international recognition and a record of performance in their sport. The O-1A visa is a strong option for coaches who demonstrate extraordinary ability, typically evidenced by championship titles, sustained winning records, or recognition as integral to their team’s success. To qualify, a coach must establish that their expertise places them among the small percentage of top professionals in their field. For athletes seeking permanent status in the U.S., the EB-1A immigrant petition —often referred to as the “extraordinary ability green card”—provides a direct path to lawful permanent residency. It requires clear documentation that the individual is among the very best in their sport and has achieved sustained national or international success. Unlike other green card categories, the EB-1A does not require employer sponsorship and can be self-petitioned. This has become a common path for MMA world champions, BJJ black belt medalists, Olympic athletes, and chess grandmasters—many of whom now represent the U.S. at the highest levels of international competition. It’s important to note that U.S. immigration law defines “athlete” broadly. Whether you are a professional football player in Europe, a sprinter from the Caribbean, a judoka, a gymnast, or a grandmaster in chess, your achievements may qualify under these categories if they are properly documented and presented. The key is a consistent record of excellence and recognition in your sport on a national or international scale. Our office specializes in these types of immigration matters. Whether you are an individual athlete looking to relocate or an organization seeking to bring international talent to your roster, we offer tailored legal strategies to support your goals. If you are exploring options to compete, train, or build your future in the U.S., we’re here to help you take the next step.
By Denice Flores June 5, 2025
In January 2025, the U.S. Congress passed the Laken Riley Act , marking a significant shift in immigration enforcement policy. The Act requires the Department of Homeland Security to detain certain non-U.S. nationals who have been arrested for theft-related offenses such as burglary, theft, larceny, or shoplifting. Under this Act, the Department of Homeland Security must detain an individual who: (1) is unlawfully present in the United States or did not possess the necessary documents when applying for admission; and (2) has been charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or admits to having committed acts that constitute the essential elements of burglary, theft, larceny, or shoplifting. The Act also authorizes states to sue the federal government for decisions or alleged failures related to immigration enforcement. It authorizes state governments to sue for injunctive relief over certain immigration-related decisions or alleged failures by the federal government if the decision or failure caused the state or its residents harm, including financial harm of more than $100. Specifically, the state government may sue the federal government over a: Decision to release a non-U.S. national from custody; Failure to fulfill requirements relating to inspecting individuals seeking admission into the United States, including requirements related to asylum interviews; Failure to fulfill a requirement to stop issuing visas to nationals of a country that unreasonably denies or delays acceptance of nationals of that country; Violation of limitations on immigration parole, such as the requirement that parole be granted only on a case-by-case basis; or Failure to detain an individual who has been ordered removed from the United States. The Act's stringent detention requirements may lead to increased fear and uncertainty within immigrant communities. Individuals who are merely accused of certain crimes could face mandatory detention. The Act may also affect legal immigration processes. Increased detention and deportation efforts could strain resources, potentially leading to delays in processing visas and asylum applications. Given the evolving legal landscape: Stay Informed and/or Seek Legal Counsel - Consult with your immigration attorney to understand how new laws and policies may affect your situation and if you or someone you know is facing immigration-related legal issues. Know Your Rights - Familiarize yourself with your legal rights, especially concerning interactions with law enforcement and immigration authorities. Community Engagement - Participate in community organizations that provide support and resources for immigrants, fostering a network of assistance and advocacy. If you have any questions or would like to consult with an experienced immigration attorney, contact our office to schedule a consultation.
By Kris Quadros-Ragar May 29, 2025
In a renewed wave of enforcement, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has started sending formal alerts to certain F-1 students participating in Optional Practical Training (OPT), flagging that their records reflect over 90 days without any reported employment. These students have been advised to update their employment status in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) within 15 days. Failure to take timely corrective action may lead to the termination of the student's SEVIS record, effectively marking them as out of status, and may ultimately trigger removal proceedings. The notices are intended as a warning that students who do not comply with OPT reporting obligations are at risk of serious immigration consequences. Understanding OPT and Its Unemployment Limits Optional Practical Training (commonly referred to as “OPT”) is a work authorization benefit that allows eligible F-1 international students to gain hands-on experience in their field of study. Students may apply for pre-completion OPT (while still in school) or post-completion OPT (after graduation), typically for up to 12 months. Those with degrees in qualifying STEM fields may apply for an additional 24-month STEM OPT extension, giving them a total of 36 months of work authorization in the U.S. To maintain valid F-1 status while on OPT, students must remain actively employed in a position related to their field of study. The amount of time a student may remain in the United States while on OPT without being properly employed is capped at: 90 days during the standard 12-month post-completion OPT, and 150 days for those on the STEM OPT extension, which includes any days of unemployment accrued during the initial OPT period. These unemployment limits are cumulative and enforced strictly through SEVIS monitoring. What Should F-1 Students Do? If you are an F-1 student on OPT or STEM OPT and receive a warning or are unsure about your compliance status, act quickly: Contact your Designated School Official (DSO) immediately to review and, if necessary, update your SEVIS record. Ensure all employment is properly documented and reported through your school’s international office. Do not ignore warning notices, as failure to respond may lead to SEVIS termination and potentially the initiation of removal proceedings. It is also advisable to consult with a qualified immigration attorney to explore available options and understand how enforcement actions may affect your status or future immigration plans. If you received a notice or have questions about your F-1 status, our attorneys are here to help you take the right steps to protect your future in the United States. Contact us today to schedule a consultation.
Show More