Filed: Aug. 08, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: 10-5158 BIA Sallar v. Holder Sichel, IJ A070 699 940 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NO
Summary: 10-5158 BIA Sallar v. Holder Sichel, IJ A070 699 940 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOT..
More
10-5158 BIA
Sallar v. Holder Sichel, IJ
A070 699 940
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
SUMMARY ORDER
RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER
FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF
APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER
IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN
ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY
ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan
United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of
New York, on the 8th day of August, two thousand twelve.
PRESENT:
ROBERT D. SACK,
GERARD E. LYNCH,
SUSAN L. CARNEY,
Circuit Judges.
AMI SALLAR, A/K/A FREDA AMI SALLAR-
JOSEPH,
Petitioner,
v. 10-5158
NAC
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
FOR PETITIONER: Jaime Recabo, Bronxville, New York.
FOR RESPONDENT: Tony West, Assistant Attorney
General; Leslie McKay, Assistant
Director; Melissa K. Lott, Attorney,
Office of Immigration Litigation,
United States Department of Justice,
Washington, D.C.
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a
Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review
is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
Ami Sallar, a native and citizen of Ghana, seeks review
of a November 17, 2010, order of the BIA affirming the
September 15, 2009, decision of Immigration Judge Helen
Sichel, which denied her request for sua sponte reopening of
her immigration proceedings. In re Sallar, No. A070 699 940
(B.I.A. Nov. 17, 2010), aff’g No. A070 699 940 (Immig. Ct.
N.Y. City Sept. 15, 2009). We assume the parties’
familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history
in this case.
The petition for review is DISMISSED for lack of
jurisdiction, because “we are without jurisdiction to review
the Agency’s failure to reopen removal proceedings sua
sponte.” Mahmood v. Holder,
570 F.3d 466, 469 (2d Cir.
2009) (citing Ali v. Gonzales,
448 F.3d 515, 518 (2d Cir.
2006); 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.2(a), 1003.23(b)(1)). Moreover,
there is no indication that the agency mis-perceived its
2
authority to reopen or Sallar’s eligibility for the relief
she sought. Cf. id.
FOR THE COURT:
Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk
3