USCA11 Case: 19-14331 Date Filed: 02/18/2021 Page: 1 of 11 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 19-13446 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 8:19-cv-01954-TPB-AAS KEILA ROSA CAMARENA, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, ERO Tampa Field Office, SECRETARY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, Acting Secretary, Defendants-Appellees. ________________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida ________________________ ________________________ No. 19-14331 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:19-cv-24407-RNS USCA11 Case: 19-14331 Date Filed: 02/18/2021 Page: 2 of 11 JAVIER BARRIOS, LILIANA MARIELA PATO, Plaintiffs-Appellants, versus ACT. SEC. DEPT. DHS KEVIN K. MCALEENAN, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security, ACTING DIRECTOR MATTHEW T. ALBENCE, in his official capacity as Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al., Defendants-Appellees. ________________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (February 18, 2021) Before WILSON, GRANT, and TJOFLAT, Circuit Judges. GRANT, Circuit Judge: These consolidated appeals involve two immigrants who admit that they are subject to valid removal orders. Still, when the government moved to execute those orders, they sued. Both had applied for provisional unlawful presence waivers; those waivers, if granted, would give them an easier time getting back into the United States in the future. They say that the government cannot remove them just yet because that would interfere with their “regulatory rights” to remain in the United States while they apply for the waivers. But their applications do not 2 USCA11 Case: 19-14331 Date Filed: 02/18/2021 Page: 3 of 11 give us jurisdiction to interfere with the execution of their removal orders. We therefore affirm the district courts’ orders dismissing their petitions. I. A. Keila Camarena, a native and citizen of the Dominican Republic, entered the United States on a tourist visa in March 2002. That visa authorized her to stay for only six months. But soon after her arrival, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services approved a change of status request and issued her an H1B1 visa. Her new H1B1 visa permitted her to remain in the United States until June 2005. Three years after her departure deadline, Camarena—still in the United States—petitioned to become a permanent resident. When Citizenship and Immigration Services denied her petition, the Department of Homeland Security initiated removal proceedings against her. Those proceedings ended roughly four years later, when an immigration judge ordered her removed. Camarena never appealed that decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals and never petitioned this Court for review. Instead of removing her immediately, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) issued her an order of supervision. That order required that she periodically check in at the agency’s Tampa office. This arrangement lasted nearly six years, until the agency decided to execute her outstanding removal order, requiring that she depart the United States the next month. But shortly before her final departure date, Camarena sought to stay her removal by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus and an emergency motion for 3 ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals