
EOIR OCAHO Decisions
The Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO) issued a precedent decision in Mangewala v. Sail Internet Inc., 19 OCAHO no. 1552f (2026), a case arising under the antidiscrimination provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1324b. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued an order summarizing a recent prehearing conference. At the conference, the ALJ granted the respondent’s oral motion for withdrawal of counsel and inclusion of new counsel. The ALJ also referred the case to OCAHO’s Settlement Officer Program for a period of sixty days, accepting the parties’ oral consent to the referral as memorialized in the ALJ’s written order.
The Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO) issued a precedent decision in United States v. JBK Management LLC, 22 OCAHO no. 1685 (2026), a case arising under the employer sanctions provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1324a. Because the respondent failed to file a timely answer to the complaint, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued an order to show cause, ordering the respondent to file an answer pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 68.9(c) and to file a submission demonstrating good cause for its failure to timely file an answer. The ALJ warned the respondent that failing to respond as ordered could result in entry of default judgment against the respondent.
The Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO) issued a precedent decision in Wahid v. Hengshuai Automotive, Inc., 22 OCAHO no. 1686 (2026), a case arising under the antidiscrimination provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1324b. Because the respondent failed to file a timely answer to the complaint, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued an order to show cause, ordering the respondent to file an answer pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 68.9(c) and to file a submission demonstrating good cause for its failure to timely file an answer. The ALJ warned the respondent that failing to respond as ordered could result in entry of default judgment against the respondent.