Case: 18-60843 Document: 00515210446 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/22/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 18-60843 November 22, 2019 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk ELVIA RUIZ ORTIZ, also known as Elvia Ruiz; JAIME SILVESTRE BARRON RUIZ; LORENA GISELLE BARRON RUIZ; ELVIA GUADALUPE BARRON RUIZ, Petitioners, versus WILLIAM P. BARR, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals No. A 205 639 522 No. A 205 639 523 No. A 205 639 524 No. A 205 639 525 Case: 18-60843 Document: 00515210446 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/22/2019 No. 18-60843 Before DAVIS, SMITH, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Elvia Ruiz Ortiz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing her appeal of the order of removal issued by the immigration judge (“IJ”). 1 Ruiz Ortiz contends that the Immigration Court (“IC”) lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the removal proceedings because the Notice to Appear (“NTA”) was not compliant with the applicable regulations and was not served simultaneously on her when it was filed with the IC. Further, Ruiz Ortiz contends that the NTA contained a false representation concerning the information provided to her, which rendered the IJ’s removal order invalid. The determination that an alien is not eligible for asylum is a factual determination reviewed under the substantial-evidence standard. Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006). Under that standard, “reversal is improper unless the court decides not only that the evidence supports a contrary conclusion, but also that the evidence compels it.” Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 518 (5th Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Ruiz Ortiz’s theory that the omission in her NTA of the time and date of her removal hearing rendered the NTA invalid and deprived the IC of jurisdic- tion in light of Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018), is without merit. This court determined that Pereira addressed only the “narrow question” *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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 1Ruiz Ortiz is the lead petitioner; the remaining petitioners, her three minor children, are derivative beneficiaries on her application. 2 Case: 18-60843 Document: 00515210446 Page: 3 Date Filed: 11/22/2019 No. 18-60843 whether a NTA “that omits the time or place of the initial hearing triggers the statutory stop-time rule for cancellation of removal.” We declined to extend the rule in Pereira beyond the stop-time rule to removal proceedings under 8 U.S.C. § 1229. Pierre-Paul v. Barr, 930 F.3d 684, 688−89 (5th Cir. 2019). Additionally, Ruiz Ortiz’s acknowledgement, at her removal hearing, that she had received service of the NTA, stating the time and place of the hearing, and her concession that she was subject to removal waived any ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals