USCA11 Case: 20-14380 Date Filed: 11/19/2021 Page: 1 of 8 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 20-14380 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ MAUDILIO LOPEZ-GARCIA, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A075-431-320 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 20-14380 Date Filed: 11/19/2021 Page: 2 of 8 2 Opinion of the Court 20-14380 Before WILSON, JORDAN, and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Maudilio Lopez-Garcia seeks review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming an immigration judge’s denial of his motion to rescind his in absentia removal order and reopen his proceedings. The BIA concluded that his motion should be denied because he had received proper notice of the conse- quences of failing to appear before the IJ. Mr. Lopez-Garcia argues that the BIA erred in denying his motion because the notices that he received did not explain all of the consequences; they did not explain that the in absentia removal order could only be rescinded in two ways or that judicial review of that order was limited to review of the notice’s validity, the rea- sons for his absence, and whether he is removable. He admits that the notices did warn him that a removal order could be entered against him as a consequence, but he contends that even this warn- ing was not proper because it used the word “may” where the stat- ute uses “shall.” The government argues that the notices contained the required explanation of the consequences, and did not need to explain the legal procedure necessary to reverse that consequence. Further, the government argues that the word “may” was not im- proper. For reasons explained below, we deny Mr. Lopez-Garcia’s petition for review. USCA11 Case: 20-14380 Date Filed: 11/19/2021 Page: 3 of 8 20-14380 Opinion of the Court 3 I Mr. Lopez-Garcia, a native and citizen of Guatemala, en- tered the United States around June of 1997. He was fifteen years old and without his family when he crossed the border; he came because his family was “very poor.” A.R. at 90. In August 1997, Mr. Lopez-Garcia was apprehended by the Immigration and Naturalization Service and issued a Notice to Ap- pear, which charged him as removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i), for being present in the United States without be- ing admitted or paroled. Among other things, the form notice stated: If you fail to attend the hearing at the time and place designated on this notice, or any date and time later directed by the Immigration Court, a removal order may be made by the immigration judge in your ab- sence, and you may be arrested and detained by the INS. Id. at 164. But Mr. Lopez-Garcia could not read or understand the Notice to Appear, so he took it “to a lady who had a money transfer store, who had said that she understood the [i]mmigration [l]aw.” Id. at 90. She …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals