NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 23a0162n.06 Case No. 21-3173 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Apr 10, 2023 ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk DAVIDA MERLY VASQUEZ-VASQUEZ; ) KAREN AYMAR LAINEZ-VASQUEZ, ) Petitioners, ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW ) FROM THE UNITED STATES v. ) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION ) APPEALS MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, ) Respondent. ) OPINION ) Before: SUTTON, Chief Judge; LARSEN and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. SUTTON, Chief Judge. An immigration court sent Davida Vasquez-Vasquez’s counsel notice of a removal hearing. When Vasquez-Vasquez failed to appear, the immigration judge ordered her removed. Because the court complied with all statutory and constitutional requirements in notifying Vasquez-Vasquez of the hearing and because she nonetheless failed to attend it, we deny her petition for review. A native of Guatemala, Davida Merly Vasquez-Vasquez fled her home country with a newborn baby and entered the United States on October 16, 2016. Vasquez-Vasquez applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The immigration court set Vasquez-Vasquez’s removal hearing for January 2017. It rescheduled the hearing several times over the coming years and mailed notice of each new date Case No. 21-3173, Vasquez-Vasquez, et al. v. Garland to Vasquez-Vasquez’s counsel once she obtained representation. The court eventually landed on a June 7, 2019 hearing date. Vasquez-Vasquez and her counsel attended the June 7 hearing. As misfortune would have it, the foreign language translator spoke only Spanish, not Vasquez-Vasquez’s Mayan Mam dialect. The immigration judge adjourned the hearing and agreed to reschedule it. Later that day, the court mailed a notice to Vasquez-Vasquez’s counsel, rescheduling the hearing for June 21. Vasquez-Vasquez’s counsel received the notice on Friday, June 14, and forwarded it to Vasquez-Vasquez on Monday, June 17. Vasquez-Vasquez apparently did not receive the notice in time and did not answer her counsel’s phone call on June 20. When Vasquez-Vasquez failed to appear at the hearing, the immigration judge ordered her removed. She moved to reopen and rescind, claiming that the judge should have personally served her notice and that exceptional circumstances excused her absence. The judge denied the motion, and Vasquez-Vasquez appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals. The Board dismissed the appeal, reasoning that service to Vasquez-Vasquez’s counsel was proper and that exceptional circumstances did not excuse her absence. Vasquez-Vasquez petitioned this court for review. If an alien fails to attend a removal hearing, she “shall be ordered removed.” 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(A). An immigration court may reopen and rescind a removal order due to an alien’s failure to appear if the alien files a motion “demonstrat[ing] that [she] did not receive notice” in accordance with statutory requirements or that “exceptional circumstances” excused her absence. Id. § 1229a(b)(5)(C); Cruz-Gomez v. Lynch, 801 F.3d 695, 697 (6th Cir. 2015). Under the statutory notice requirements, immigration officials must provide written notice of time changes to an alien’s removal hearing “in person to the alien (or, if personal service is not practicable, through 2 Case No. 21-3173, …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals