Andrew Michael Knapp

Andrew Knapp is an adjunct professor at Southwestern Law School in Los Angeles, California and Western State College of Law in Irvine, California, where he teaches both law schools’ Ninth Circuit Appellate Litigation Clinics. In that capacity, he regularly serves, along with his law students, as appointed pro bono counsel for immigration cases assigned through the Ninth Circuit’s law school clinic pro bono program. Andrew and his law students have won most of their pro bono Ninth Circuit appointed immigration cases, including Chavez Garcia v. Sessions, 871 F.3d 991 (9th Cir. 2017), Dimaya v. Lynch, 803 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2015), Muniz Alvarado v. Lynch, 603 . 637 (9th Cir. 2015), Gomez Ponce v. Holder, 571 . 528 (9th Cir. 2014), and Hernandez v. Holder, 738 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir. 2013). The clinic’s big win in Dimaya v. Lynch was affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5 to 4 decision, Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S.Ct. 1204 (2018), in which Justice Kagan, writing for the majority, affirmed the Ninth Circuit’s invalidation of a criminal removal provision as unconstitutionally void for vagueness. Andrew also successfully moved the Ninth Circuit in Marinelarena v. Sessions, 886 F.3d 737 (9th Cir. 2018), to reconsider, before an 11 judge panel, the only case he and his Southwestern Appellate Litigation Clinic lost in a published decision (Marinelarena v. Sessions, 869 F.3d 780 (9th Cir. 2017). Subsequently, the 11 judge en banc panel, ruling 8 to 3, flipped this decision in Marinelarena v. Barr, 930 F.3d 1039 (9th Cir. 2019).

Andrew also serves as the Chief Financial Officer and lead volunteer attorney for Immigrant Access to Justice Assistance (“IAJA”), a charitable nonprofit which provides pro bono representation before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to disadvantaged noncitizens who would otherwise go without legal representation. Andrew’s last full time employment was as a staff attorney for the Board of Immigration Appeals in Falls Church, Virginia, from 2010 to 2011, drafting decisions for three Board member panels. Before that, he practiced immigration law in Los Angeles for over 10 years with Cifuentes Knapp & Associates, and for nearly 4 years in Orange County as a solo practitioner. Prior to that, he worked for the former U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service as an asylum officer in the mid 1990’s.

For over the past 25 years, Andrew has successfully represented numerous noncitizens before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In all of his published cases, his clients have prevailed both before the Ninth Circuit, and, on remand, before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) and the Immigration Court. Andrew’s BIA wins include Matter of Ordaz, 26 I&N Dec. 637 (BIA 2015), abrogated in part on other grounds by the U.S. Supreme Court in Pereira v. Sessions, S.Ct. , 2018 WL 3058276 (June 21, 2018) (holding that a notice to appear that was served but never resulted in the commencement of removal proceedings does not have “stop time” effect for purposes of establishing eligibility for cancellation of removal). Andrew’s published Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals wins include: Chavez Garcia v. Sessions, 871 F.3d 991 (9th Cir. 2017) (holding that the Immigration Judge’s failure to inform Chavez-Garcia that his departure from the United States would constitute a waiver of his previously reserved right to appeal rendered his purported appeal waiver constitutionally invalid); Dimaya v. Lynch, 803 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2015) (striking down a criminal deportation statute as unconstitutionally void for vagueness); Hernandez v. Holder, 738 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir. 2013) (holding that the Board of Immigration Appeals’ “place of filing” rule – mandating that a motion to reopen must be filed with the Immigration Judge after the Board dismisses a direct appeal on timeliness grounds – is not a jurisdictional bar to the Board’s authority to reopen removal proceedings); Mejia Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818 (9th Cir. 2011) (finding a motion to reopen filing deadline equitably tolled for nearly seven years and that the petitioner’s waiting for his wife’s application to be adjudicated first was reasonable under the circumstances and did not show a lack of due diligence); De Rodriguez Echeverria v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2008) (remanding where the Immigration Judge “erred in determining that Rodriguez was not under arrest at the time she gave her incriminating statement”); Recinos De Leon v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir. 2005) (where the Immigration Judge’s opinion was “literally incomprehensible” and the BIA summarily affirmed without opinion, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals could not review the substance of the decision and was required to remand); Reyes Melendez v. INS, 342 F.3d 1001 (9th Cir. 2003) (remanding where the Immigration Judge was “aggressive,” “snide,” and accused the noncitizen of moral impropriety, and where the Judge’s bias precluded full consideration of the noncitizen’s relevant hardship factors); Guadalupe Cruz v. INS, 240 F.3d 1209 (9th Cir. 2001) (holding that the BIA erred by not correcting the due process violation committed by the Immigration Judge’s erroneous application of the newly enacted “stop time” rule before its April 1, 1997 effective date).

Andrew’s accolades include the Alumni Achievement Award he was conferred on November 5, 2016 by his alma mater, Western State Law School, and the Ninth Circuit Distinguished Pro Bono Award, he and his supervising professor, Professor Gowri Ramachandran, were awarded by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit at a ceremony at the Ninth Circuit’s Pasadena courthouse on September 26, 2018.

Andrew has participated as a panelist on many immigration law conference programs presented by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and local and national bar associations, including the June 15, 2018 American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) Annual Conference seminar entitled “Preventing the Demise of Due Process,” the June 23, 2017 AILA Annual Conference seminar entitled “Void for Vagueness: How to Apply Johnson in the Immigration Context,” the January 14, 2016 United States Court of Appeals “Immigration Law Training,” the December 13, 2014 Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA) seminar entitled “Practicing Immigration Law before the Ninth Circuit and U.S. District Court,” the November 9, 2012 AILA California Chapters Conference seminar entitled “The Modified Categorical Approach in the Ninth Circuit,” the November 13, 2009 AILA California Chapters Conference seminar entitled “ICE Update - The ICE Storm,” the March 11, 2008 National AILA audio seminar entitled “TPS: What Kind of Status Is It?,” the October 24, 2012 AILA Southern California Chapter (SoCal AILA) seminar entitled “Beyond the Master Calendar Hearing: An Introductory Overview of Removal Defense for Newer Practitioners and Refresher Course for Existing Practitioners,” the March 17, 2010 SoCal AILA seminar entitled “Ninth Circuit Update,” the July 22, 2009 SoCal AILA seminar entitled “Nuances of Unlawful Presence,” the August 28, 2008 SoCal AILA seminar entitled “Immigration Court Practice Manual,” the July 20, 2006 SoCal AILA seminar entitled “Reinstatement of Removal and I 212 Waivers After Fernandez Vargas,” the May 27, 2004 Mexican American Bar Association (MABA) seminar entitled “Fighting Back Against the Unauthorized Practice of Law,” the May 15, 2003 SoCal AILA seminar entitled “Asylum/NACARA Update,” the June 27, 2002 MABA seminar entitled “How to do a Successful Motion to Reopen Before the Immigration Court,” and the November 3, 2001 AILA California Chapters Conference seminar entitled “KUTV New Channels for Victims of Crimes and Lonesome Spouses.”

Andrew’s articles and publications include:

“Void for Vagueness: How to Apply Johnson in the Immigration Context,” published in the 2017 American Immigration Lawyers Association Annual Conference Handbook

Editor, 2013 American Immigration Lawyers Association California Chapters Conference Handbook

“The Modified Categorical Approach in the Ninth Circuit,” published in the 2012 American Immigration Lawyers Association California Chapters Conference Handbook

“ICE Update The ICE Storm,” published in the 2009 American Immigration Lawyers Association California Chapters Conference Handbook

BIA Finds Service Of OSC On Two Year Old Defective For Failure To Serve The Child’s Mother (,0927 )

Reopening Deportation Proceedings: A Look At Applicable Exceptions To Motions To Reopen (,0214 )

Andrew’s unpublished BIA victories are available on the internet at:

Hugo Alvarado Cortez A070 781 971 BIA Mar 10 2014 (vacating the denial of an I 130 step-parent, post-divorce, visa petition because the “case law does not require proof of active parenting and continuing financial support by a step parent.”)

Daniel Nava A099 317 368 BIA March 30 2012 (reducing the bond set by an immigration judge from $20,000 to $7,500 for a criminal noncitizen with a pending Ninth Circuit appeal under Casas Castrillon v. DHS, 535 F.3d 942 (9th Cir. 2008))

Maritza Santos Ardon A073 904 816 BIA Aug 27 2013 (reopening proceedings for a single mother to apply for suspension of deportation as the parent of a U.S. born child who was battered by the child’s other, lawful permanent resident parent)

(finding the service of the deportation charging document on a two year old defective for failure to serve the child’s mother)