Case ID: f-appx_435/html/0607-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Orlando TURCIOS, aka Orlando Arauz, Orlando Salcedo, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 05-72258.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted April 15, 2009.
    Filed May 31, 2011.
    Christopher John Stender, Esquire, Federal Immigration Counselors, Inc., APC, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Charles Canter, Marion Guyton, Esquire, Allen Warren Hausman, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, OIL, Alison Drucker, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: SILER, KLEINFELD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The Honorable Eugene E. Siler, Senior Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

The Board of Immigration Appeals erred as a matter of law in concluding that it lacked jurisdiction to hear Turcios’s case because his notice of appeal was received late due to delivery service error. The thirty-day time limit contained in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.38 is a claim-processing rule, not a jurisdictional limitation. Irigoyen-Briones v. Holder, 644 F.3d 943 (9th Cir.2011). We remand to the agency to permit it fully to reconsider whether, under the circumstances presented, it will hear the appeal from the Immigration Judge’s decision in this case.

The PETITION IS GRANTED, the Board’s decision VACATED, and the case REMANDED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.