NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 18-1857 _____________ JORGE ROSENDO DE JESUS, AKA Jorge Luis Benancio-Collas, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent _______________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the United States Department of Justice Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A200-021-485) Immigration Judge: Honorable John B. Carle _______________ Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) October 30, 2018 Before: CHAGARES, JORDAN, and VANASKIE, Circuit Judges. (Filed: November 28, 2018) _______________ OPINION* _______________ JORDAN, Circuit Judge. * This disposition is not an opinion of the full court and, under I.O.P. 5.7, does not constitute binding precedent. Jorge Rosendo De Jesus petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal from the denial of his motion to reopen an in absentia removal order. For the reasons that follow, we will deny the petition in part and dismiss it in part. I. BACKGROUND De Jesus entered the United States from Mexico without inspection in April 2006. Almost immediately thereafter, on May 5, 2006, he was detained during a traffic stop and transferred to the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) officials. De Jesus admitted that he was a native and citizen of Mexico and in the United States illegally.1 He was personally served with a Notice to Appear (“NTA”) and then released from custody. The NTA charged “Jorge ROSENDO DE JESUS,” alien number A200-021-485, with being removable as an alien present in the United States without being admitted or paroled. It listed De Jesus’s address as the ICE facility where he was being detained. It also ordered him to appear before an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on November 6, 2006 at 1:00 pm and described the allegations against him, including that he is a native and citizen of Mexico. The NTA went on to warn that if De Jesus moved and failed to provide a new mailing address, the government would be relieved of its obligation to provide further written notice concerning his hearing and that a failure to attend his hearing could result in a removal order being entered in his absence. The Certificate of Service in De Jesus’s alien file specifies that, when he was 1 De Jesus disputes that he is a native and citizen of Mexico. 2 given the NTA, he was provided oral notice in Spanish of the “time and place” of his immigration hearing “and of the consequences of failure to appear.” (App. at 135.) De Jesus apparently signed the Certificate of Service, acknowledging personal service. So did an immigration officer. In August 2006, a Notice of Hearing in Removal Proceedings was mailed to De Jesus at the ICE facility listed on the NTA. The Notice of Hearing listed an incorrect alien number, A00-021-485, mistakenly dropping the “2” that should have followed “A.” De Jesus failed to appear at his immigration hearing on November 6, 2006. Nevertheless, an IJ ordered him removed to Mexico. The ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals