NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Submitted October 18, 2019* Decided October 21, 2019 Before JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge No. 19‐1027 SHARAREH SHOJAEDDINI and Petition for Review of an Order of the MARYAM JAHANGIRI, Board of Immigration Appeals. Petitioners, v. Nos. A078‐208‐227 & A078‐208‐228 WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General of the United States, Respondent. ORDER Sharareh Shojaeddini, a native of Iran and citizen of Norway, and her daughter Maryam Jahangiri, a native and citizen of Norway, petition for review of the denial of their motion to reconsider and terminate their removal proceedings. Shojaeddini and Jahangiri argue that the immigration judge (and the Board of Immigration Appeals) did not have jurisdiction over their removal proceedings because the Notices to Appear sent to them by the Department of Homeland Security lacked the requisite time‐and‐date * We agreed to decide the case without oral argument because the dispositive issue has been authoritatively decided. See FED. R. APP. P 34(a)(2)(B). No. 19‐1027 Page 2 information in violation of both the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a)(1)(G)(i), and the regulations defining the immigration court’s authority. We rejected this same argument in Ortiz‐Santiago v. Barr, 924 F.3d 956 (7th Cir. 2019), holding that absence of this information in a notice did not deprive the immigration judge of jurisdiction. Because this immigration judge had jurisdiction and Shojaeddini and Jahangiri did not timely object to the defective notice, we deny the petition for review. Shojaeddini and her family fled Iran in 1986 to avoid persecution and eventually settled in Norway. Several years later Shojaeddini became a naturalized citizen and after that gave birth to her daughter in Norway. Soon thereafter, Shojaeddini came to the United States and sought asylum. On her application Shojaeddini did not disclose that she was a Norwegian citizen or that she had been living there since 1986. She falsely stated that she was married to an Iranian citizen who had been detained and tortured in Iran. In 2001 Shojaeddini and Jahangiri were granted asylum, and in 2006 they received permanent‐resident status. Two years later the Department of Homeland Security began investigating Shojaeddini for asylum fraud and served her and her daughter with separate notices charging them as removable because they were inadmissible aliens under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(A). Shojaeddini was charged based on her failure to report her Norwegian citizenship on her asylum application. See id. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i). Jahangiri, by extension, was charged as removable because she relied on a fraudulent grant of asylum to obtain permanent‐resident status. See id. § 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I). The notices that they received, however, did not specify the time and date of their removal hearings. That information came later in separate documents. An immigration judge consolidated Shojaeddini’s and Jahangiri’s removal proceedings. The mother and daughter admitted the allegations, and the IJ found them removable. After further proceedings ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals