Case ID: f-appx_275/html/0671-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ramon RIOS-PALACIOS, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 06-73219.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted April 17, 2008.
    Filed April 25, 2008.
    Elias P. Batchelder, Susan M. Freeman, Robert G. Schaffer, Lewis & Roca, LLP, Phoenix, AZ, for Petitioner.
    Ramon Rios-Palacios, pro se.
    District Director, Office of the District Chief Counsel, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Phoenix, AZ, Lauren E. Fascett, Oil, Holly M. Smith, Linda S. Wendtland, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: TROTT and THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and HOGAN, District Judge.
    
      
       The Honorable Michael R. Hogan, United States District Judge for the District of Oregon, sitting by designation.
    
   ORDER

Upon reconsideration of the Appellate Commissioner’s August 7, 2007 order, Respondent’s July 18, 2007 motion to remand to the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) is granted. The BIA shall consider Ramon Rios-Palacios’s claim that the doctrine of res judicata, or claim preclusion, bars a successive removal proceeding based on charges the Department of Homeland Security could have asserted in a prior proceeding, in light of Bravo-Pe-droza v. Gonzales, 475 F.3d 1358 (9th Cir. 2007).

REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.