PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 19-2239 ____________ WILSON N. GUADALUPE, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A096-432-645) Immigration Judge: Annie S. Garcy Argued on December 11, 2019 Before: RESTREPO, ROTH and FISHER, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed February 26, 2020) Marcia Kasdan (ARGUED) Law Offices of Marcia S. Kasdan 127 main Street 1st Floor Hackensack, NJ 07601 Counsel for Petitioner Lindsay Corliss (ARGUED) United States Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation Room 2207 P.O. Box 878 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 Counsel for Respondent O P I N I ON ROTH, Circuit Judge: In Pereira v. Sessions,1 the Supreme Court held that a Notice to Appear (NTA) that omits the time and date of appearance does not stop a noncitizen’s continuous residency period. The issue before us is whether Pereira abrogated our 1 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018). 2 decision in Orozco-Velasquez v. Attorney General,2 where we held that an NTA that omits the time and date may be “cured” with a later Notice of Hearing that provides the missing information. We now hold that Pereira does abrogate Orozco- Velasquez. It is our conclusion that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) may no longer rely on a Notice of Hearing to cure a defective NTA. I. FACTS Wilson Guadalupe came to the United States from Ecuador in November 1998. In 2001, he met Raquel Torres, a United States citizen. They married in February 2003. Torres filed an “immediate relative” petition on behalf of Guadalupe, and he was granted conditional permanent resident status. Guadalupe’s marriage to Torres soured quickly and the couple divorced in 2006. Shortly thereafter, Guadalupe applied for removal of the conditional basis of his permanent resident status, claiming that, despite his divorce from Torres, the marriage had not been entered into for the purpose of procuring Guadalupe’s admission to the United States as an immigrant. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) interviewed Guadalupe about his marriage to Torres. He maintained that their marriage was bona fide. Torres, however, signed an affidavit, stating that Guadalupe married her for immigration purposes. USCIS concluded that Guadalupe’s marriage to Torres had not been in good faith; on April 30, 2007, USCIS terminated Guadalupe’s conditional resident status. 2 817 F.3d 78 (3d Cir. 2016). 3 Guadalupe was then placed in removal proceedings. On May 11, 2007, DHS sent him an NTA. The NTA omitted the date and time for the removal hearing, indicating that the date and time would be set later. Four days later, the Immigration Court mailed Guadalupe a Notice of Hearing that contained the date and time. Guadalupe, along with his counsel, attended the hearing before the IJ on June 5, 2007. The IJ took additional testimony on October 23, 2008. On November 6, the IJ denied Guadalupe’s motion for relief from removal and ordered him to voluntarily depart or be removed. The ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals