Casco Ayala v. Garland


FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT May 3, 2021 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court NELSON ARIEL CASCO AYALA; FERNANDO JOSE CASCO AYALA, Petitioners, v. No. 20-9579 (Petition for Review) MERRICK B. GARLAND, United States Attorney General, ∗ Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT ** _________________________________ Before MORITZ, BALDOCK, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Petitioners Nelson Casco Ayala and Fernando Casco Ayala filed applications for asylum, which an immigration judge denied after a hearing. The Bureau of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed on appeal. Petitioners then sought ∗ On March 11, 2021, Merrick B. Garland became Attorney General of the United States. Consequently, his name has been substituted for William P. Barr as Respondent, per Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2). ** After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. reconsideration and requested a remand to the immigration judge based on new evidence. The BIA denied the motion, and Petitioners filed a petition for review. Exercising jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, we deny the petition. I. BACKGROUND Petitioners Nelson Casco Ayala and Fernando Casco Ayala 1 are brothers and natives of Honduras who entered the United States without inspection in 2014. Shortly after their arrival they were served with a Notice to Appear and charged with removability under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). They appeared in immigration court in 2015 and conceded removability, but their attorney requested a continuance to allow them to prepare an asylum application. Because Petitioners were unaccompanied minors when they arrived in the United States, their attorney obtained additional continuances so that their asylum application could be first considered by United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). See Harmon v. Holder, 758 F.3d 728, 734 (6th Cir. 2014) (observing that under the Immigration and Nationality Act, “unaccompanied alien children [have] the right to have their asylum applications reviewed in the first instance by an asylum officer with the USCIS”). The USCIS, however, determined Petitioners were ineligible for asylum and returned their applications to the immigration court. R. at 344, 476. 1 The immigration judge and the BIA listed the surnames for Petitioners as “Ayala-Casco.” Their attorney filed this petition for review using the surnames “Casco Ayala,” which is consistent with the documentation submitted by Petitioners. We therefore use “Casco Ayala” in this opinion. 2 The immigration court then scheduled a hearing in March 2018 on Petitioners’ asylum applications. Two weeks before the hearing, Petitioners’ attorney moved to withdraw. At the hearing the immigration judge confirmed Petitioners no longer …

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