16-4257(L) Diaby v. Wilkinson 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. 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 17th day of February, two thousand twenty-one. PRESENT: SUSAN L. CARNEY, Circuit Judge, * JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge. † _________________________________________ MOYABI DIABY A.K.A. DIABY MOYABI, Petitioner, v. No. 16-4257 No. 20-1194 ROBERT M. WILKINSON, ‡ * Circuit Judge Peter W. Hall, originally a member of the panel, is currently unavailable. The appeal is being decided by the remaining members of the panel, who are in agreement. See 2d Cir. IOP E(b). † Judge John G. Koeltl, of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation. ‡Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2), Acting Attorney General Robert M. Wilkinson is automatically substituted for former Attorney General William P. Barr as Respondent. Respondent. _________________________________________ FOR PETITIONER: GARY J. YERMAN, ESQ., NEW YORK, NY. FOR RESPONDENT: LINDA CHENG, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation (ANTHONY P. NICASTRO, Assistant Director, on the brief), for Jeffrey Bossert Clark, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of these petitions for review of two orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petitions are DENIED. The petitioner, Mr. Moyabi Diaby (“Diaby”), a native and citizen of Côte d’Ivoire, seeks review of (1) the BIA order entered on December 2, 2016, dismissing his appeal of the decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”), dated September 23, 2015, that denied his application for cancellation of removal under Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) § 240A(b)(1) (No. 16-4257, the “2016 Petition”); and (2) the BIA order entered on March 10, 2020, denying his motion to reconsider and reopen (No. 20-1194, the “2020 Petition”). In addition, the Court has construed a letter from Diaby as a petition to review the BIA order entered on December 19, 2018, denying his motion to reopen. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history, and recount them only to the extent relevant to the Court’s disposition. Procedural Background On September 23, 2015, the IJ ordered Diaby removed to Côte d’Ivoire on the charge of presence without being admitted or paroled pursuant to INA § 212(a)(6)(A)(i). 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). The IJ denied Diaby’s application ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals