FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT July 9, 2021 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court KAREN ABIGAIL ROMERO-DE GUZMAN; K.A.G.-R., Petitioners, v. No. 20-9540 (Petition for Review) MERRICK B. GARLAND, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT** _________________________________ Before TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge, BRISCOE, and BACHARACH, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Karen Abigail Romero-de Guzman and her minor daughter are natives and citizens of El Salvador who entered the United States without permission. An On March 11, 2021, Merrick B. Garland became Attorney General of the United States. Consequently, his name has been substituted for William P. Barr as Respondent, per Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2). ** 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 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel.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. immigration judge (IJ) found them removable and ineligible for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), and ordered that they be returned to their home country. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed their appeal from the IJ’s order. They now petition for review of the BIA’s decision. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a), and we deny the petition. I. BACKGROUND & PROCEDURAL HISTORY Romero and her daughter entered the United States without permission in July 2014. Border Patrol agents soon apprehended them and the government began removal proceedings. Romero conceded removability and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection. Romero’s daughter did not separately petition for relief. To the extent permitted by law, her claims are entirely derivative of her mother’s. We will therefore refer to Romero as if she is the only petitioner. An immigration judge (IJ) denied all forms of relief and ordered that Romero be removed to El Salvador. She appealed to the BIA, which affirmed in all respects in a single-member summary disposition. She then petitioned this court for review (No. 15-9546). Shortly after she filed her opening brief in that original appeal, the government moved to remand the case to the BIA so that, in the exercise of its prosecutorial discretion, the case could be administratively closed. We granted that motion in September 2016 and the BIA then administratively closed Romero’s proceedings. In July 2017, the government moved the BIA to reopen proceedings against 2 Romero. The BIA granted the motion and gave the parties an opportunity to file supplemental briefs. Romero did not file a supplemental brief. In March 2020, the BIA again affirmed the IJ’s decision in Romero’s case in a single-member decision. This latest decision—the agency’s …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals