Immigration · Primary-source case analysis

Dada v. Mukasey: A Noncitizen May Withdraw Voluntary Departure to Pursue Reopening

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published April 26, 2026

Dada reconciles the statutory right to file one motion to reopen with the fixed deadline and penalties attached to voluntary departure.

Two statutory mechanisms collided

Samson Dada accepted voluntary departure and later filed a motion to reopen based on an approved visa petition. The departure period could expire before the agency decided the motion, exposing him to penalties if he stayed.

The departure period is not automatically tolled

The Court rejected automatic tolling because the statute fixes the voluntary-departure period and treats timely departure as the quid pro quo for avoiding a removal order.

Withdrawal preserves the reopening right

To give effect to the statutory motion-to-reopen right, a noncitizen must be permitted to withdraw the voluntary-departure request before its period expires. Withdrawal forfeits voluntary departure but avoids penalties tied to overstaying it.

Disposition

The Court vacated and remanded so Dada could seek withdrawal and pursue reopening. Timing was essential because withdrawal had to occur before expiration.

Key takeaways

• Calendar the voluntary-departure expiration immediately.
• File any reopening motion and withdrawal request promptly.
• Explain the consequences of giving up voluntary departure.
• Do not assume filing alone pauses the departure clock.