Pipul v. Sessions

17-294 Pipul v. Sessions BIA Vomacka, IJ A079 258 939 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. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 26th day of June, two thousand eighteen. PRESENT: JON O. NEWMAN, DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, GERARD E. LYNCH, Circuit Judges. _____________________________________ MOHAMMED UZZAL PIPUL, AKA MOHAMMED MAHIDUR RAHMAN, Petitioner, v. 17-294 NAC JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. _____________________________________ FOR PETITIONER: Amy Nussbaum Gell, Gell & Gell, New York, NY. FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General; Emily Anne Radford, Assistant Director; David J. Schor, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review is DENIED. Petitioner, Mohammed Mahidur Rahman, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, using the name Mohammed Uzzal Pipul, seeks review of a January 11, 2017, decision of the BIA affirming an April 19, 2016, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) ordering removal and concluding that he was ineligible to adjust status based on his marriage to a United States citizen because he had previously filed a frivolous asylum application. In re Mohammed Uzzal Pipul, a.k.a. Mohammed Mahidur Rahman, No. A 079 258 939 (B.I.A. Jan. 11, 2017), aff’g No. A079 258 939 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Apr. 19, 2016). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history in this case, which are included only as necessary to explain our decision to deny the petition for review. 2 Because the petitioner’s true name is Mohammed Mahidur Rahman, we refer to him as Rahman. In 1998, Rahman applied for asylum under his true identity.1 The application was denied, and in 1999, he was ordered removed from the United States. In 2001, Rahman filed a second asylum application using a false name (Pipul) and a false birth date. The 2001 application reflected that he had not previously filed for asylum. This application was granted, and Rahman became a lawful permanent resident under the name Pipul. He was placed in removal proceedings when the agency discovered his misrepresentation. The agency concluded that Rahman’s second application was frivolous, and thus bars him from adjusting to lawful permanent resident ...

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