With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". counsel, respectively, do not warrant termination. See id. Santos’s allegation of a violation of 8 C.F.R. § 236.1(e), regarding the right to communicate with consular officers, likewise does not warrant termination. See United States v. De La Pava, 268 F.3d 157, 165 (2d Cir.2001). Finally, Santos’s argument that the Government violated 8 C.F.R. § 287.6(a)by submitting the Form 1-213 without authentication does not provide a basis for termination because Santos was not prejudiced by the submission. See Waldron v. INS, 17 F.3d 511, 518 (2d Cir.1993). To the extent Santos wishes to argue that the unauthenticated 1-213 should be afforded diminished evidentiary weight, he will have an opportunity to do so on remand. See Xiao Ji Chen v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 471 F.3d 315, 342 (2d Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). For the foregoing reasons, the petition for

A: holding that the weight afforded to documentary evidence  lies largely within the discretion of the ij
B: holding that the decision as to the weight to be afforded to documentary evidence  lies largely within the discretion of the ij
C: holding that the weight afforded to the evidence lies largely within the agencys discretion
D: holding that the weight accorded to documentary evidence lies largely within the ijs discretion
D.