Case: 17-60605 Document: 00515069356 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/08/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 17-60605 August 8, 2019 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JINGYU ZHONG, Petitioner v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petitions for Review of Orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A087 879 471 Before JOLLY, JONES, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * In July 2010 the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) served Jingyu Zhong, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, with a notice to appear. The DHS alleged, inter alia, that Zhong was removable as an alien who had failed to maintain or comply with the conditions of the nonimmigrant status under which he was admitted. Zhong filed an asylum application. He subsequently filed a motion for a continuance with the Immigration Judge (IJ), * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. Case: 17-60605 Document: 00515069356 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/08/2019 No. 17-60605 informing the IJ that he had married a United States citizen and a Form I-130 visa petition had been filed on his behalf with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). He requested a continuance of proceedings so that USCIS could adjudicate the visa petition and then, afterwards, seek adjustment of status before the IJ. The IJ found that Zhong had waived the right to seek adjustment of status by not raising the issue in a timely fashion. The IJ denied Zhong’s motion for a continuance and also concluded that he was ineligible for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). On August 3, 2017, the BIA dismissed Zhong’s appeal. Zhong filed a motion to reopen, arguing, inter alia, that his attorney rendered ineffective assistance regarding the relief of adjustment of status. On April 18, 2017, the BIA denied reopening. Zhong filed timely petitions for review of both decisions of the BIA, challenging the determination that he waived the right to pursue adjustment of status, the denial of his motion for a continuance, and the determination that counsel did not render ineffective assistance. He has also filed a motion for a remand with this court, contending that his I-130 petition was approved by USCIS during the pendency of the instant petitions for review and a remand is warranted so that he may apply for adjustment of status. To the extent Zhong challenges the BIA’s August 3, 2017, dismissal of his appeal of the IJ’s final order of removal, we review the order of the BIA and will consider the underlying decision of the IJ only if it influenced the BIA’s determination. See Mikhael v. INS, 115 F.3d 299, 302 (5th Cir. 1997). Upon review, “[w]e accord deference to the BIA’s interpretation of immigration statutes unless the ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals