FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT July 15, 2019 _________________________________ Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court OLUWAFISAYO RACHAEL OGUNBODE, Petitioner, v. No. 18-9532 (Petition for Review) WILLIAM P. BARR, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before HOLMES, BACHARACH, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ An immigration judge (IJ) ordered petitioner Oluwafisayo Rachael Ogunbode removed from the United States to Nigeria. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed her appeal from the IJ’s decision and denied her motion for reopening and reconsideration. She then filed this petition for review. * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. The petition is untimely to appeal from either the BIA’s removal order or its denial of reopening and reconsideration. We therefore dismiss it for lack of jurisdiction. BACKGROUND Ogunbode is a native and citizen of Nigeria who entered the United States in 2014 on a nonimmigrant visa. In 2017 the Department of Homeland Security issued her a Notice to Appear, charging that she had overstayed her visa—by approximately two years—without authorization to remain in the United States. She conceded the charge but applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture (CAT) relief. Her applications were based on her alleged fear of being subjected to harmful tribal widowhood practices by elders of her deceased husband’s family if she returned to Nigeria. Specifically, Ogunbode alleged that her husband’s family would insist that she sleep next to her husband’s corpse for three days and drink the water used to bathe the corpse. The IJ held a removal hearing and considered Ogunbode’s applications for relief, her testimony, and the written documentation she submitted. The IJ concluded that Ogunbode’s claim was not credible. In addition, the IJ determined that Ogunbode’s asylum claim was untimely and she had failed to show changed or extraordinary circumstances sufficient to excuse the failure to apply for asylum within the one-year deadline. Finally, the IJ explained, that even if Ogunbode were deemed credible, she had failed to meet her burden to show entitlement to 2 withholding of removal or CAT relief. Although the IJ denied the requested relief, she granted Ogunbode a 60-day period of voluntary departure. Ogunbode appealed to the BIA. On February 14, 2018, the BIA dismissed her appeal, agreeing with the IJ’s reasoning and disposition of her case. As part of its order the BIA reinstated the 60-day period of voluntary departure. But the BIA warned Ogunbode that if she filed a motion to reopen ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals