NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 22a0375n.06 No. 21-3812 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Sep 16, 2022 ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk LAKHVIR SINGH, ) Petitioner, ) ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW v. ) FROM THE UNITED STATES ) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, ) APPEALS Respondent. ) ) OPINION Before: SILER, BUSH, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. MURPHY, Circuit Judge. Lakhvir Singh, a citizen of India, came to the United States illegally, so immigration officials served him with a notice to appear at removal proceedings. The government later mailed Singh another notice identifying the date of his second hearing. Soon after, however, Singh moved without updating his address. When he failed to show up at this hearing, an immigration judge ordered him removed. Five years later, Singh sought to rescind this order by alleging that he had not received the mailed notice. The immigration judge denied his request, finding either that he had received the notice or that his failure to update his address had been the reason why he did not. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed that decision. It also rejected Singh’s two other arguments: that the immigration court did not have jurisdiction because his initial “notice to appear” lacked the date and time of his initial hearing; and that the Board should reopen his proceedings on its own initiative. Singh now presents all three arguments to us. We reject the first two on the merits and dismiss the last one on jurisdictional grounds. No. 21-3812, Singh v. Garland I Singh was born and raised in India. In early 2013, shortly after his eighteenth birthday, he attempted to evade authorities and enter the United States illegally at an Arizona point of entry. Immigration officials detained him. During an interview with an asylum officer, Singh expressed a fear for his life if he returned to India. He and his father are Sikhs who supported Simranjit Singh Mann’s political party after his father left the Akali Dal Badal party. According to Singh, members of his father’s former party attacked Singh twice in retaliation for his father’s decision to join a rival. The first attack left Singh hospitalized. When he informed the police, officers threatened Singh and ordered him to tell his father to switch parties. After the second attack, Singh opted to flee India. The asylum officer found that Singh had established a credible fear of persecution in his country. While the government detained Singh in Arizona, an immigration official personally served him with a notice to appear in removal proceedings that would occur before an Arizona immigration court at a date and time “to be set.” Admin. R. (A.R.) 109. A few days later, another official personally served Singh with a notice identifying the time and date of an initial hearing as 8:30 a.m. on April 25, 2013. Singh attended this scheduling hearing. Court staff served him with an additional notice setting his removal hearing for June. A few days later, …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals