USCA11 Case: 22-12647 Document: 17-1 Date Filed: 05/16/2023 Page: 1 of 9 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 22-12647 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ SAMUEL ANTONIO MURILLO-JUAREZ, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A098-118-913 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 22-12647 Document: 17-1 Date Filed: 05/16/2023 Page: 2 of 9 2 Opinion of the Court 22-12647 Before WILSON, ANDERSON, and ED CARNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Samuel Antonio Murillo-Juarez petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order affirming the Immigra- tion Judge’s (IJ) denial of his motion to reopen and rescind an in absentia order of removal, based on his alleged lack of notice of his removal hearing. He contends that the IJ and BIA failed to consider significant evidence and asks us to reverse the BIA’s decision deny- ing his motion to reopen. He argues that the totality of the evi- dence rebuts the presumption of delivery of the notice of hearing. I. Murillo-Juarez, 1 a native and citizen of Honduras, entered the United States without inspection on or about May 15, 2004. He told Border Patrol agents that he was with his older sister Carla Patricia Murillo-Juarez, and the two were traveling to live with family in Miami. Carla provided the agents with a specific address 1 For the first time on appeal to the BIA, Murillo-Juarez asserted that his real name was “Samuel Antonio Alvarado Casco” and that the NTA “arguably does not apply to him” because it listed the wrong name and as a result was “factually incorrect.” He did not make that argument to the IJ. And no other documents or forms in the record — besides his submissions to the BIA — contain that name. His brief to this Court refers to him as “Samuel Murillo- Juarez” or “Petitioner.” He has abandoned any argument that the NTA did not apply to him because it did not contain the correct name. USCA11 Case: 22-12647 Document: 17-1 Date Filed: 05/16/2023 Page: 3 of 9 22-12647 Opinion of the Court 3 the two were headed to: 740 Northeast 86th Street, Miami, Florida 22128. That same day, a Border Patrol agent personally served Mu- rillo-Juarez with a notice to appear (NTA), which charged him as removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i) for being present in the United States without being admitted or paroled. The NTA or- dered him to appear before an IJ on July 28, 2004, at 8:30 a.m. and provided the address of the immigration court in Miami. It also stated that Murillo-Juarez was required to provide his mailing ad- dress, and he listed 740 Northeast 86th Street, Miami, Florida as his current address. The NTA specified that if his mailing address changed, Murillo-Juarez was required to submit written notice of that change. Murillo-Juarez signed the NTA and put his fingerprint on it. On June 21, 2004, a notice of hearing was mailed …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals