18-735 Lopez-Garcia v. Barr BIA Nelson, IJ A099 479 858 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 10th day of December, two thousand twenty. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 REENA RAGGI, 8 RICHARD C. WESLEY, 9 RAYMOND J. LOHIER, JR, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 GILMER ANTONIO LOPEZ-GARCIA, 14 Petitioner, 15 16 v. 18-735 17 NAC 18 WILLIAM P. BARR, UNITED STATES 19 ATTORNEY GENERAL, 20 Respondent. 21 _____________________________________ 22 23 FOR PETITIONER: Matthew C. Lamb, Pryor Cashman 24 LLP, New York, NY. 25 26 Keith M. Rosen, Norton Rose 27 Fulbright US LLP, New York, NY. 28 1 FOR RESPONDENT: Cindy S. Ferrier, Assistant 2 Director; Andrew N. O’Malley, 3 Senior Litigation Counsel, Office 4 of Immigration Litigation, United 5 States Department of Justice, 6 Washington, DC. 7 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 8 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 9 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 10 is GRANTED. 11 Petitioner Gilmer Antonio Lopez-Garcia, a citizen of 12 Guatemala, seeks review of a February 14, 2018 decision of 13 the BIA affirming a January 4, 2017 decision of an Immigration 14 Judge (“IJ”) pretermitting his asylum application as untimely 15 filed. In re Gilmer Antonio Lopez-Garcia, No. A 099 479 858 16 (BIA Feb. 14, 2018), aff’g No. A 099 479 858 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. 17 City Jan. 4, 2017). We assume the parties’ familiarity with 18 the underlying facts and procedural history. 19 We review the IJ’s decision as modified and supplemented 20 by the BIA. Wala v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 102, 105 (2d Cir. 21 2007). An asylum application generally must be filed within 22 one year of entry. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(B). This time 23 limit may be excused based on “either the existence of changed 24 circumstances which materially affect the applicant’s 2 1 eligibility for asylum or extraordinary circumstances 2 relating to the delay in filing.” Id. § 1158(a)(2)(D). When 3 the time limit is excused, an application must be filed 4 “within a reasonable period given” any “changed” or 5 “extraordinary” circumstances. 8 C.F.R. 6 §§ 1208.4(a)(4)(ii), (a)(5). Our jurisdiction to review 7 findings regarding timeliness or reasonableness of delay ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals