Filed: Jul. 29, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-60621 Summary Calendar JUAN SENDEJO-RIVAS, Petitioner, versus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. _ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A14 202 553 _ July 29, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, HIGGINBOTHAM, and STEWART, Circuit Judges: PER CURIAM:* Juan Sendejo-Rivas petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision dismissing his motion to reopen his appeal as
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-60621 Summary Calendar JUAN SENDEJO-RIVAS, Petitioner, versus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. _ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A14 202 553 _ July 29, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, HIGGINBOTHAM, and STEWART, Circuit Judges: PER CURIAM:* Juan Sendejo-Rivas petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision dismissing his motion to reopen his appeal as ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-60621
Summary Calendar
JUAN SENDEJO-RIVAS,
Petitioner,
versus
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,
Respondent.
__________________________________________
Petition for Review of an Order
of the Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A14 202 553
__________________________________________
July 29, 1999
Before KING, Chief Judge, HIGGINBOTHAM, and STEWART, Circuit Judges:
PER CURIAM:*
Juan Sendejo-Rivas petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision
dismissing his motion to reopen his appeal as untimely.
Due to the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 and the Illegal
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, this court lacks jurisdiction to
review Sendejo-Rivas’ petition. See Nguyen v. INS,
117 F.3d 206, 207 (5th Cir. 1997). IT IS
ORDERED that this petition is DISMISSED.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the
limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.