Juarez-Gonzalez v. Sessions


17-567 Juarez-Gonzalez v. Sessions BIA Montante, IJ A206 439 148 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 TO 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 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 23rd day of August, two thousand eighteen. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 ROSEMARY S. POOLER, 8 REENA RAGGI, 9 DENNY CHIN, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 MARIA DEL CARMEN JUAREZ- 14 GONZALEZ, AKA CARMEN JUAREZ, 15 Petitioner, 16 17 v. 17-567 18 NAC 19 JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, 20 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 21 Respondent. 22 _____________________________________ 23 24 FOR PETITIONER: Jose Perez, Syracuse, NY. 25 26 FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant 27 Attorney General; Douglas E. 28 Ginsburg, Assistant Director; John 29 M. McAdams, Jr., Attorney, Office 30 of Immigration Litigation, United 31 States Department of Justice, 32 Washington, DC. 33 1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 2 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 3 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 4 is DENIED. 5 Petitioner Maria Del Carmen Juarez-Gonzalez, a native 6 and citizen of Guatemala, seeks review of a January 31, 7 2017, decision of the BIA affirming a June 21, 2016, 8 decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Juarez- 9 Gonzalez’s motion to rescind her removal order entered in 10 absentia and reopen removal proceedings. In re Maria Del 11 Carmen Juarez-Gonzalez, No. A206 439 148 (B.I.A. Jan. 31, 12 2017), aff’g No. A206 439 148 (Immig. Ct. Buffalo June 21, 13 2016). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the 14 underlying facts and procedural history in this case. 15 We have reviewed both the IJ’s and the BIA’s opinions 16 “for the sake of completeness.” Wangchuck v. Dep’t of 17 Homeland Sec., 448 F.3d 524, 528 (2d Cir. 2006). When, as 18 here, an alien seeks both rescission of an in absentia removal 19 order and reopening of removal proceedings to apply for relief 20 from removal, we treat the request as “comprising distinct 21 motions to rescind and to reopen.” Alrefae v. Chertoff, 471 22 F.3d 353, 357 (2d Cir. 2006); see also Maghradze v. Gonzales, 23 462 F.3d 150, 152 n.1 (2d Cir. 2006). We review the denial 24 of a motion to rescind an in absentia removal order under the ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals