Casset v. Sessions

16-3418-ag Casset v. Sessions 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 A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 29th day of January, two thousand eighteen. PRESENT: DENNIS JACOBS, REENA RAGGI, CHRISTOPHER F. DRONEY, Circuit Judges. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X Diodio Casset and Djiguiba Dit Ayouba Kamara, Petitioners, -v.- 16-3418 Jefferson B. Sessions III, United States Attorney General, Respondent. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X FOR PETITIONERS: Justin Conlon, Law Offices of Justin Conlon, Hartford, CT. FOR RESPONDENT: Steven K. Uejio (Chad A. Readler, Linda S. Wernerty, on the brief), Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington D.C. 1 Appeal from a judgment of the Board of Immigration Appeals. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the petition for review be DENIED. Diodio Casset and Djiguiba Kamara petition for review of the denial of their applications for cancellation of removal before the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues presented for review. Casset and Kamara petitioned for cancellation of removal pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b), which provides relief from removal for an alien who can establish, among other qualifications, “physica[l] presen[ce] in the United States for a continuous period of not less than 10 years.” 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1). Because the “continuous period” for the purposes of the statutory scheme ends when the alien is served a Notice to Appear (“NTA”), Casset and Kamara must show physical presence beginning in February 1999. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(1); Tablie v. Gonzales, 471 F.3d 60, 62 (2d Cir. 2006). Continuous physical presence is broken if the alien departs from the United States for longer than 90 days or for any periods that, in the aggregate, exceed 180 days. 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(2). Casset is a national of Senegal who has resided in the United States since at least 2001. Her husband, Kamara, is a national of Cote d’Ivoire who has resided in the United States since at least 2004. Casset’s business visitor status expired in September 2001 and Kamara’s nonimmigrant LULAC status expired in January 2008, so both have ...

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