SINGH v. GARLAND (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.2021-08-03No. No. 19-71887

Summary · law.co

Holding. The petition for review is dismissed because the court lacks jurisdiction to review an immigration judge's denial of a motion to reopen a credible fear determination in expedited removal proceedings.

A petitioner challenged a Board of Immigration Appeals decision that had dismissed his appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The petitioner's underlying appeal concerned an immigration judge's rejection of his motion to reopen proceedings related to a credible fear determination. The court examined its own jurisdictional authority and found that it had previously established in a prior case that it lacks the power to review immigration judge decisions denying motions to reopen credible fear proceedings.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Court jurisdiction over credible fear determination appeals
Scope of circuit court review in expedited removal cases
Congressional intent regarding judicial review of immigration proceedings

Procedural posture

The petitioner sought review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision that dismissed an appeal of an immigration judge's denial of a motion to reopen credible fear proceedings.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

MEMORANDUM ***

Petitioner seeks review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision dismissing the appeal of an Immigration Judges (“IJ”) decision for lack of jurisdiction. Petitioner appealed the IJs denial of his motion to reopen his credible fear determination. We dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

“We determine our own jurisdiction de novo.” Pena v. Lynch, 815 F.3d 452, 455 (9th Cir. 2016) (citing Bolanos v. Holder, 734 F.3d 875, 876 (9th Cir. 2013)). This court held in Singh v. Barr that it lacks jurisdiction over petitions seeking review of an IJs denial of a motion to reopen credible fear proceedings. 982 F.3d 778, 784 (9th Cir. 2020) (“Read together, [8 U.S.C.] §§ 1252(a)(2)(A), (D) and 1252(e) provide clear and convincing evidence that Congress intended to deprive circuit courts of appeals of jurisdiction to review expedited removal orders and related matters affecting those orders, including underlying negative credible fear determinations ․”). Accordingly, the review Petitioner seeks is outside of our jurisdiction.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.