22-297-cv Santos-Torres v. Houghton UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 2 held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 3 New York, on the 9th day of December, two thousand twenty-two. 4 5 PRESENT: 6 AMALYA L. KEARSE, 7 MICHAEL H. PARK, 8 ALISON J. NATHAN, 9 Circuit Judges. 10 _____________________________________ 11 12 Sandro Yobani Santos-Torres, 13 14 Plaintiff-Appellant, 15 16 v. 22-297 17 18 Timothy J. Houghton, in his official capacity, 19 District Director, New York District Office, U.S. 20 Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. 21 Department of Homeland Security, Tracy 22 Renaud, in his official capacity, Senior Official 23 performing the duties of the Director, U.S. 24 Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. 25 Department of Homeland Security, Alejandro N. 26 Mayorkas, in his official capacity, Secretary, 27 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United 28 States Citizenship and Immigration Services, 29 United States Department of Homeland Security, 30 31 Defendants-Appellees. 32 _____________________________________ 1 FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT: Jan H. Brown, Law Offices of Jan H. 2 Brown, P.C., New York, NY. 3 4 FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES: Jessica F. Rosenbaum, Christopher 5 Connolly, Assistant United States Attorneys, 6 Of Counsel, for Damian Williams, United 7 States Attorney for the Southern District of 8 New York, New York, NY. 9 10 Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of 11 New York (Abrams, J.). 12 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND 13 DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 14 Appellant Sandro Yobani Santos-Torres appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 15 complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Santos-Torres was ordered removed in absentia 16 in 2004 after failing to appear at his removal proceeding. In 2019, Santos-Torres filed an I-212 17 application with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) for permission 18 to reapply for admission. USCIS denied the application in 2020 after weighing several factors, 19 including Santos-Torres’s family ties and his prior order of removal. Almost a year later, Santos- 20 Torres challenged USCIS’s July 2020 denial in federal court. The district court dismissed for lack 21 of subject matter jurisdiction, finding that USCIS’s denial of the I-212 application was an 22 unreviewable discretionary determination and that Santos-Torres’s complaint constituted an 23 indirect challenge to his removal order that was …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals