Jose Romero-Ramirez v. William Barr, U. S. Atty Ge


Case: 18-60098 Document: 00514904835 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/05/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 18-60098 FILED April 5, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce JOSE JAVIER ROMERO-RAMIREZ, Clerk Petitioner v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A028 890 409 Before JOLLY, COSTA, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Board of Immigration Appeals denied Jose Javier Romero-Ramirez’s motion to reopen his deportation proceedings. Romero-Ramirez appeals, arguing that he did not receive actual notice of his original deportation hearing because he moved without informing immigration officials. Because we find that the Board acted within its discretion in denying Romero-Ramirez’s motion to reopen, we AFFIRM. * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. Case: 18-60098 Document: 00514904835 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/05/2019 No. 18-60098 I. Jose Javier Romero-Ramirez, a native of Honduras, entered the United States in 1990 without inspection. Soon after he entered the country, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) apprehended him and issued an order to show cause (OSC). The OSC alleged that Romero-Ramirez was eligible to be deported because his entry was unauthorized and ordered him to appear before an Immigration Judge (IJ) at a date and time “to be scheduled.” This OSC further warned Romero-Ramirez that failure to attend the hearing may result in a determination being made in his absence. On April 25, 1990, the OSC was personally served on Romero-Ramirez and listed the address he provided to the INS, “110 E. La. Chappelle, San Antonio, Texas 78204.” Two weeks later, on May 10, 1990, a notice of master calendar hearing (NTA or “hearing notice”) was sent to the San Antonio address listed on the OSC informing Romero-Ramirez that his hearing was scheduled for June 8, 1990 at 8:00 A.M. at 727 E. Durango Blvd Rm A-513 San Antonio, TX 78206. This notice was not returned as undeliverable or otherwise not properly received. Romero-Ramirez did not show up for his June 8, 1990 hearing and the IJ held an in absentia deportation hearing and found Romero-Ramirez deportable as charged. The immigration court mailed the deportation order to the San Antonio address Romero-Ramirez provided on the OSC but the order was returned—“return to sender . . . attempted — not known.” Twenty-six years later, in 2016, Romero-Ramirez filed a motion to reopen his deportation proceedings, stay deportation, and rescind the in absentia deportation order. In this motion, Romero-Ramirez argues that reopening was warranted because he did not receive notice of the 1990 deportation hearing. He concedes that the sole reason he did not receive notice was that he had moved from the San Antonio address within a week of receiving the OSC. He also concedes that he did not recall informing the 2 Case: ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals