Case: 17-15529 Date Filed: 01/09/2020 Page: 1 of 10 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 17-15529 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A073-603-874 SANZIDA AKTAR, a.k.a. Manisha Mazumder, a.k.a. Manisha Dey, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (January 9, 2020) Case: 17-15529 Date Filed: 01/09/2020 Page: 2 of 10 Before ROSENBAUM, BRANCH, and MARCUS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Sanzida Aktar petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) denial of her motion to reopen her application for asylum, United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“CAT”) relief, and withholding of removal. Aktar has continuously resided in the United States since 1993 when she entered from Bangladesh on a visitor’s visa. She was denied asylum in both 1996 and 2008 and was detained for removal in 2017. On appeal, she argues the BIA erroneously concluded that the 90-day deadline for motions to reopen should not be waived due to changed conditions within her home country of Bangladesh or otherwise equitably tolled based on her prior counsels’ ineffective assistance in connection with her initial asylum applications. She also asserts that she has a due-process interest in having her case reopened pursuant to the BIA’s sua sponte authority and claims that we have jurisdiction to review that claim. Because Aktar does not contest the alternate ruling of the BIA—that she did not show a prima facie case for asylum—we must deny the petition. I. Background In October 1993, Aktar, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, entered the United States with a visa but remained beyond her authorized stay. With the 2 Case: 17-15529 Date Filed: 01/09/2020 Page: 3 of 10 assistance of an immigration attorney, Sheldon Walker, 1 she applied for asylum in December 1994, but her application was administratively closed in 1996 because she failed to appear for her interview. In June 2007, Aktar was detained by an officer with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) after a transportation check at a bus station. A few months later, through her new counsel, Rita Altman, Aktar filed another application for asylum or withholding of removal on the basis of religion, political opinion, and gender.2 In February 2008, the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denied Aktar’s application for asylum, CAT relief, and withholding of removal. 3 The IJ found her testimony 1 Sheldon Walker was later disbarred for fraudulent immigration services. Aktar claims to be one of his victims and that he fabricated personal information in her initial application for asylum. The government disputes this fact. Because the BIA implicitly accepted this fact, we will assume its veracity for the purposes of this opinion. See Ruiz v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 440 F.3d 1247, 1255 (11th Cir. 2006) (holding that the BIA’s findings of fact will be reversed only if the “the record compels a reversal”). 2 In that application, she claimed she had suffered ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals