20-119(L) Bertrand v. Garland BIA Montante, IJ A077 889 197 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 14th day of March, two thousand twenty-two. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 RICHARD C. WESLEY, 8 SUSAN L. CARNEY, 9 Circuit Judges. * 10 _____________________________________ 11 12 ESPERANCE BERTRAND, 13 Petitioner, 14 20-119(L), 15 v. 20-4063(Con) 16 NAC 17 MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED 18 STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 19 Respondent. 20 _____________________________________ 21 22 FOR PETITIONER: Robert F. Graziano, Esq., 23 Tonawanda, NY. 24 25 FOR RESPONDENT: Brian M. Boynton, Acting 26 Assistant Attorney General, Civil 27 Division; John S. Hogan, Assistant * Judge Robert A. Katzmann, originally assigned to this panel, has since died. The remaining two judges, being in agreement, have decided the matter. See 2d Cir. IOP E(b). 1 Director, Office of Immigration 2 Litigation; Todd J. Cochran, Trial 3 Attorney, Office of Immigration 4 Litigation, United States 5 Department of Justice, Washington, 6 DC. 7 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of these petitions for review of 8 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decisions, it is hereby 9 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 10 in 20-119(L) is DENIED and the petition for review in 20- 11 4063(Con) is DENIED in part and DISMISSED in part. 12 Petitioner Esperance Bertrand, a native and citizen of 13 Haiti, seeks review of (1) a November 23, 2020 decision of 14 the BIA denying his motion to reopen, In re Esperance 15 Bertrand, No. A077 889 197 (B.I.A. Nov. 23, 2020), and (2) a 16 December 31, 2019 decision of the BIA affirming an August 5, 17 2019 decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his 18 application for withholding of removal and relief under the 19 Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), In re Esperance Bertrand, 20 No. A077 889 197 (B.I.A. Dec. 31, 2019), aff’g No. A077 889 21 197 (Immig. Ct. Batavia Aug. 5, 2019). We denied a request 22 for stay of removal, Dkt. No. 54 (May 18, 2020), and we are 23 advised that Petitioner has been removed. We assume the 24 parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural 25 history. 2 1 A. 20-119(L), Order of Removal 2 Because the BIA’s decision “closely tracks the IJ's 3 reasoning,” we …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals