United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 22-2379 ___________________________ Tsatsral Bekhbat; Orgilbold Uranchimeg lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioners v. Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General of the United States lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: February 17, 2023 Filed: July 27, 2023 ____________ Before SMITH, Chief Judge, STRAS and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________ SMITH, Chief Judge. Petitioners Tsatsral Bekhbat and Orgilbold Uranchimeg (collectively, “petitioners”) petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (Board) June 17, 2022 decision denying their motion for reconsideration of the Board’s July 29, 2021 decision. In the July 29, 2021 decision, the Board granted the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) motion to reinstate the petitioners’ removal proceedings and reissued the Board’s prior October 15, 2013 decision, which dismissed the petitioners’ appeal of a decision denying their applications for asylum and related protection. For the reasons stated herein, we deny the petition for review. I. Background The petitioners are natives and citizens of Mongolia. They were married in 2001. Uranchimeg entered the United States on December 30, 2001, as a nonimmigrant exchange visitor with authorization to remain in the United States until June 20, 2002. He failed to depart as required. Bekhbat entered the United States on June 2, 2004, on a student visa. She failed to attend university as her visa required. On September 28, 2009, the petitioners applied for asylum. On November 24, 2009, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services United States Asylum Office denied their application. On January 4, 2010, DHS issued a Notice to Appear (NTA), charging Bekhbat with removability under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(C)(i), for failure to maintain or comply with conditions of her nonimmigrant status, and Uranchimeg under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(B), for overstaying his visa. In removal proceedings, the petitioners admitted the NTA’s factual allegations and conceded removability as charged. On February 9, 2012, the immigration judge (IJ) found the petitioners removable as charged and designated Mongolia as the country of removal. It also denied the petitioners’ renewed requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and for relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). But the IJ did order that the petitioners “be granted voluntary departure, without expense to the Government, if they depart the United States by April 9, 2012.” A.R. at 183–84. In granting voluntary departure, the IJ warned, “If a [petitioner] files a Motion to Reopen or Reconsider, prior to the expiration of the voluntary departure period that has been given to that [petitioner], the voluntary departure period is automatically terminated, and the -2- alternate order of removal will take effect immediately as to that [petitioner].” Id. at 183. The petitioners timely appealed to the Board. On October 15, 2013, the Board dismissed the petitioners’ appeal of the IJ’s February 9, 2012 decision. Though it dismissed the appeal, the Board permitted the petitioners “to voluntarily depart the United States, without expense to the Government, within 60 days from the date of this order or any extension beyond that …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals