Guam Motion for Order of Remand for further consideration is a legal request made by a party involved in a legal case pertaining to the jurisdiction of Guam, a U.S. territory located in Micronesia. This motion is typically filed when a party believes that the case should be sent back to the lower court or administrative agency for further deliberation or reconsideration. The Guam Motion for Order of Remand for further consideration can be categorized into different types based on the specific grounds on which the motion is being filed. Some of these types include: 1. Lack of Jurisdiction: This type of motion is filed when the party argues that the court or agency did not have the authority to make a decision or ruling on the matter due to lack of jurisdiction over the subject or the parties involved. 2. Error of Law: In this type of motion, the party asserts that the court or agency committed a legal error in the original decision or ruling, which requires further review and consideration. 3. New Evidence: When new evidence is discovered or becomes available after the original decision, a party may file a motion asserting that this evidence should be considered by the court or agency. This type of motion aims to prompt a remand for further consideration in light of this new evidence. 4. Procedural Inadequacy: Parties may file a motion for remand if they believe that there were procedural inadequacies or errors in the original proceedings or hearings, such as improper notice, denial of due process, or failure to follow applicable rules of procedure. 5. Manifest Injustice: If there is a clear and obvious injustice resulting from the original decision or ruling, a party may file a motion asserting that the case should be remanded for further consideration to rectify the injustice. In conclusion, the Guam Motion for Order of Remand for further consideration is a legal tool used to request that a case be sent back to a lower court or administrative agency for additional review and consideration. Different types of this motion include those based on lack of jurisdiction, error of law, new evidence, procedural inadequacy, and manifest injustice.