16‐3981 Flores v. United States UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT _______________ August Term, 2017 (Submitted: November 22, 2017 Decided: March 15, 2018) Docket No. 16‐3981 _______________ EDUARDO FLORES, PATRICIA FLORES, Plaintiffs‐Appellants, – v. – UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant‐Appellee. _______________ B e f o r e: KATZMANN, Chief Judge, WALKER, CALABRESI, Circuit Judges. _______________ Plaintiffs Eduardo and Patricia Flores (husband and wife) appeal from the decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Wexler, J.) awarding summary judgment to the Government dismissing the Floreses’ claims brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”). The district court concluded that the FTCA’s two‐year statute of limitations barred Mr. Flores’ claims, that his claims were not saved by the continuing violation doctrine or equitable tolling, and that Mrs. Flores had failed to exhaust her administrative remedies. We find no error and AFFIRM the judgment of the district court. _______________ Sandra Lynn Greene, Greene Fitzgerald, Advocates & Consultants, York, PA, for Plaintiffs‐Appellants. Robert B. Kambic, Varuni Nelson, Assistant United States Attorneys, for Richard P. Donoghue, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, NY, for Defendant‐ Appellee. _______________ PER CURIAM: This appeal calls on us principally to decide whether claims brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671‐2680, were timely filed in federal district court. We conclude that the district court committed no error in finding that the claims were filed outside of the statute’s two‐year statute of limitations and were not saved by the continuing violation doctrine or equitable tolling. We accordingly AFFIRM the judgment below. Plaintiff‐Appellant Eduardo Flores, a native of Ecuador, legally entered the United States in 1978 but overstayed his visa. He subsequently applied for legal permanent resident (“LPR”) status, which the Immigration and Naturalization 2 Service (“INS”) granted on July 3, 1979. INS stamped his Ecuadorian passport the same day with an insignia reading “temporary evidence of lawful admission for permanent residence valid until 1‐2‐80.” App. 24. Approximately five months later, on November 9, 1979, INS denied Mr. Flores’ application for adjustment of status and gave him until December 9, 1979 to voluntarily depart from the country. Mr. Flores remained, and on January 17, 1994, an immigration judge (“IJ”) ordered that Mr. Flores be deported. The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissed Mr. Flores’ appeal on August 15, 2000. On or about August 12, 2008, Mr. Flores was arrested at his home and placed into immigration detention. He was held for approximately three months until he was placed on supervised release.1 Mr. Flores subsequently filed a 1 The Order of Supervision stated in relevant part that the conditions of release were imposed “[b]ecause the Department [of Homeland Security] has not effected your deportation or removal during the period prescribed by law,” and required, inter alia, that Mr. Flores not travel outside a certain geographical radius without first notifying the department at least 48 hours in advance. App. 84. 3 motion with ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals