USCA11 Case: 21-10400 Date Filed: 03/23/2022 Page: 1 of 8 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-10400 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ ANDRE MARIE NGONO, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A207-715-713 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 21-10400 Date Filed: 03/23/2022 Page: 2 of 8 2 Opinion of the Court 21-10400 Before JILL PRYOR, BRANCH, and GRANT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Andre Marie Ngono, proceeding pro se, petitions this Court for review of a final order of removal. Ngono asserts that he is a victim of a “severe form of trafficking in persons” within the mean- ing of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA), 22 U.S.C. § 7101 et seq., and that the order of removal violates a pro- vision of the Act that requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to permit certain victims of human trafficking to remain in the United States if they have filed a civil suit against their alleged traf- fickers—as Ngono has done—and the lawsuit remains pending. We conclude that the immigration judge lacked the authority to adjudicate Ngono’s request to remain in the United States under the relevant provision of the TVPA, and that the immigration judge did not abuse her discretion by refusing to suspend Ngono’s removal proceedings while he pursued that relief. We therefore deny Ngono’s petition. I. Ngono, a native and citizen of Cameroon, entered this coun- try in 2006 as a nonimmigrant visitor for pleasure. He was subse- quently issued a student visa with authorization to remain in the United States until late 2010. In December 2019, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) initiated removal proceedings against Ngono and charged him as removable because he had overstayed his student visa and because he had been convicted of a crime USCA11 Case: 21-10400 Date Filed: 03/23/2022 Page: 3 of 8 21-10400 Opinion of the Court 3 relating to immigration fraud. Several months later, DHS submit- ted additional charges alleging that Ngono was removable because he had been convicted of an aggravated felony and a crime involv- ing moral turpitude. During his removal proceedings, Ngono asserted that he was a victim of a “severe form of trafficking in persons” within the meaning of the TVPA. 1 He informed the immigration judge that he had applied for T and U nonimmigrant status, 2 and he requested the administrative closure of his removal proceedings and DHS’s consent to his continued presence in the United States. DHS did not consent to Ngono’s continued presence in the United States, and the immigration judge denied his request for ad- ministrative closure of his removal proceedings. The immigration judge ultimately found that Ngono was removable as charged, 1 The TVPA defines “severe forms of trafficking in persons” to include sex trafficking and “the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or ob- taining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals