Case ID: f-appx_280/html/0422-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Shiva SHARMA, Petitioner v. Michael B. MUKASEY, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 07-60548
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    June 5, 2008.
    
      Kyle D. Brown, McAllen, TX, for Petitioner.
    Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, EM Trominski, District Director, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service District Directors Office, Harlingen, TX, for Respondent.
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Shiva Sharma petitions this court to review a Notice of Intent to Issue a Final Administrative Removal Order issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Notice of Intent charged Sharma with being removable based on prior aggravated felony convictions. Sharma argues that his state convictions for identity theft in the first degree, in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 190.80, do not qualify as aggravated felonies for immigration purposes. Respondent contends that this court lacks jurisdiction over the petition for review because it does not seek review of a final order of removal.

This court examines questions related to its own jurisdiction de novo. See Balogun v. Ashcroft, 270 F.3d 274, 277 (5th Cir.2001). By statute, this court has jurisdiction to review only final orders of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a); cf. Moreira v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 709, 712-14 (5th Cir.2007). By its very terms, the Notice of Intent from which Sharma seeks review is not a final order of removal. Thus, this court is without jurisdiction to review it.

Accordingly, the petition for review is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.