An experienced immigration attorney in the greater Phoenix area, Christopher Stender has owned and operated Federal Immigration Counselors, AZ, for the past seven years. Among the many cases Christopher Stender’s has argued, one of the more recent ones includes the 2018 case Quiroz Parada v. Sessions.

1. QUIROZ PARADA
V. SESSIONS
CHRISTOPHER STENDER

2. INTRODUCTION
 An experienced immigration attorney in the greater Phoenix area, Christopher Stender
has owned and operated Federal Immigration Counselors, AZ, for the past seven years.
Among the many cases Christopher Stender’s has argued, one of the more recent ones
includes the 2018 case Quiroz Parada v. Sessions.
Overseen by Judge Richard Anthony Paez of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit, Quiroz Parada v. Sessions set a precedent for disregarding severely out-of-date
government evidence when determining presumption of future persecution in cases of
immigration removal. Mr. Quiroz Parada was only 17 when he fled to the United States
to escape the violence of the FMLN guerillas in his homeland of El Salvador. Guerillas
killed his older brother for joining the Salvadoran military and continued to beat and
terrorize his family.
The court ultimately found that the evidence presented by the State Department to a
federal immigration judge was “significantly or materially outdated” and, therefore,
unable to deny Mr. Quiroz Parada the withholding of removal that he had filed. In light
of ongoing FMLN threats against family members who were less than eight years old, the
court found that Mr. Quiroz Parada was entitled to withholding of removal and eligible
for asylum.