BLD-065 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 19-2488 ___________ JESUS OROZCO-ARROYO, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ____________________________________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A215-589-341) Immigration Judge: Kuyomars Q. Golparvar ____________________________________ Submitted on Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss, in Part, and for Summary Action on December 12, 2019 Before: AMBRO, GREENAWAY, JR., and BIBAS, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: January 6, 2020) _________ OPINION* _________ PER CURIAM * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. Petitioner Jesus Orozco-Arroyo seeks review of a final order of removal issued by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The Government has moved to dismiss in part, and summarily deny in part, the petition for review. We will grant the motion. See Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6. Orozco-Arroyo is a citizen of Mexico who entered the United States without permission in approximately 2001, at the age of three, and has remained since. In April 2018, he pleaded guilty to use and possession of drug paraphernalia in violation of Pa. C.S.A. § 780-113(a)(32), and in May 2018, he was convicted of theft by unlawful taking in violation of 18 Pa. C.S.A. § 3921(a). He was detained by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, and the Department of Homeland Security issued a notice to appear charging him as removable as an alien present in the United States without being admitted or paroled, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i), and as an alien convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, 8 U.S.C § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii). An immigration judge (IJ) sustained the first charge of removability, but not the second, as Orozco-Arroyo’s conviction was pending on direct appeal. The IJ also denied Orozco-Arroyo’s motion to terminate the proceedings in which he argued that, because the Notice to Appear (NTA) did not state a definite time and date to appear, the IJ lacked jurisdiction over the immigration proceedings pursuant to Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105, 2113-14 (2018). Orozco-Arroyo applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). 2 After a hearing, at which Orozco-Arroyo testified, the IJ denied all relief. The IJ found that the application for asylum was untimely because it was not filed within a reasonable period after Orozco-Arroyo reached the age of majority, and there were no extraordinary circumstances related to the delay. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(a)(2)(B), (a)(2)(D). The IJ also determined that Orozco-Arroyo had not established a sufficient basis for withholding under the Act, or for relief under the CAT. Orozco-Arroyo was ordered removed to Mexico. The BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision and dismissed the appeal. Orozco-Arroyo filed a timely petition for review and has moved to stay his removal. The Government opposes the stay and has filed a motion to dismiss the petition in part for lack of jurisdiction, and to summarily deny in part. In its ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals