FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ISABEL GONZALEZ-VELIZ, No. 19-72090 Petitioner, Agency No. v. A209-483-835 MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, OPINION Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted March 5, 2021 Pasadena, California Filed May 4, 2021 Before: Eugene E. Siler, * Andrew D. Hurwitz, and Daniel P. Collins, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge Siler * The Honorable Eugene E. Siler, United States Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation. 2 GONZALEZ-VELIZ V. GARLAND SUMMARY ** Immigration The panel denied Isabel Gonzalez-Veliz’s petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing her appeal from an order of an Immigration Judge deeming her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture abandoned, under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.47(c), based on her failure to submit required biometrics or establish good cause for her failure to do so. The panel held that there was no abuse of discretion in the IJ’s decision to deem Gonzalez-Veliz’s application abandoned where the IJ instructed Gonzalez-Veliz, whose counsel was present, to complete biometrics requirements before her merits hearing, ensured that she had the relevant instructions, and warned her that her failure to comply could result in her application being deemed abandoned. The panel rejected Gonzalez-Veliz’s argument that her duty to comply with biometrics requirements ended when she submitted the required application to the service center. The panel explained that the clear text of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.47(c) places the burden on the applicant to comply with biometrics requirements in conformity with the instructions to the application, which in turn direct the applicant to call a particular telephone number if she does not receive the requisite biometric receipt notices after her submission, which Gonzalez-Veliz failed to do. Because she never requested a continuance to complete the biometrics ** This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. GONZALEZ-VELIZ V. GARLAND 3 requirement, and failed to follow up after she did not receive notices of receipt of her application, the panel concluded that Gonzalez-Veliz failed to show good cause for failing to meet the requirement. The panel also concluded that the IJ did not err in failing to question the government about whether it sent Gonzalez-Veliz the biometrics submission receipt notices, as the burden was on Gonzalez-Veliz to follow up when she failed to receive the notices. The panel held that there was no abuse of discretion in the IJ’s denial of Gonzalez-Veliz’s earlier motion for a continuance to obtain an attorney where she knew of her right to hire an attorney, was given a two-month continuance to obtain counsel, was never detained, knew that the IJ would proceed with the next hearing even if she was unrepresented unless she showed good cause, did not try to contact an attorney before seeking the continuance, and was …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals