Najah Hermiz v. Merrick B. Garland


NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 21a0178n.06 No. 20-3914 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Apr 08, 2021 NAJAH NAJIB HERMIZ, aka Boulos Khleif, ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk aka Naja Najab Abou-Joudeh, ) ) Petitioner, ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW ) OF A FINAL ORDER OF THE v. ) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION ) APPEALS MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney ) General, ) OPINION ) Respondent. ) ) Before: COLE, Chief Judge; MOORE and GILMAN, Circuit Judges. KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. Najah Najib Hermiz petitions this court to review the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his motion to reopen sua sponte his immigration proceedings. For the following reasons, we DISMISS the petition for review for want of jurisdiction. I. BACKGROUND Hermiz, a native and citizen of Iraq, was admitted to the United States as a refugee in 1982. Administrative Record (“A.R.”) at 507 (Order to Show Cause at 1). He adjusted his status to Lawful Permanent Resident on October 27, 1983 as of July 29, 1982. Id. Upon his conviction for Conspiracy to Deliver a Controlled Substance under Michigan Compiled Laws § 333.7401, the trial court sentenced him on January 8, 1990 to five to twenty years’ incarceration. Id. at 24 No. 20-3914, Hermiz v. Garland (Judgment of Sentence). As a result of his conviction, the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (“I.N.S.”) issued an Order to Show Cause charging Hermiz with being deportable pursuant to former 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(2)(A)(iii) (1994) and 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(2)(B)(i) (1994). A.R. at 507, 509 (Order to Show Cause at 1, 3). On October 29, 1997, the Immigration Judge found Hermiz to be deportable as charged and denied his application for relief under Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) § 212(c) and his applications for asylum and withholding of removal because of the length of his sentence. A.R. at 439–42 (10/29/1997 IJ Hr’g Tr. at 11–14). Until repealed in 1996, INA § 212(c) (codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (1988)) permitted the Attorney General to exercise discretion to grant relief to an excludable1 or inadmissible noncitizen who had legally resided in the United States for at least seven years. Hermiz timely appealed this decision to the BIA. A.R. 416–19 (Notice of Appeal). The BIA affirmed the IJ’s denial of Hermiz’s applications for INA § 212(c) relief, asylum, and withholding of removal, and remanded to the IJ for consideration of Hermiz’s application for protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) regulations. A.R. at 373–74 (04/12/1999 BIA Decision). On remand, the IJ denied his application for withholding of removal under the CAT regulations but granted deferral of removal because the IJ concluded that Hermiz was more likely than not to be tortured if deported to Iraq. A.R. at 168 (12/20/1999 IJ Hr’g Tr. at 15). The BIA affirmed the IJ’s grant of deferral of removal. A.R. at 87–88 (12/05/2002 BIA Decision). 1 Although the plain language of INA § 212(c) mentioned only noncitizens in exclusion proceedings, the BIA …

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