Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-07-09577/USCOURTS-ca10-07-09577-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jose Luis Fernandez
Petitioner
Adrian Fernandez-Lopez
Petitioner
Luis Alberto Fernandez-Lopez
Petitioner
Patricia Fernandez-Lopez
Petitioner
Michael B. Mukasey
Respondent
Antonia Lopez Ramirez
Petitioner

Document Text:

Though petitioners have denominated their filing an “Emergency Petition 1

for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Petition for Stay of Deportation,” it is not, in

(continued...)

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

JOSE LUIS FERNANDEZ; ANTONIA

LOPEZ RAMIREZ; ADRIAN

FERNANDEZ-LOPEZ; LUIS

ALBERTO FERNANDEZ-LOPEZ;

PATRICIA FERNANDEZ-LOPEZ,

Petitioners,

v.

MICHAEL B. MUKASEY,

United States Attorney General,

Respondent.

No. 07-9577

(BIA Nos. A73-750-142, A73-750-

143, A73-750-144, A73-750-145,

A73-750-146)

ORDER

Filed November 16, 2007

Before HENRY, PORFILIO, and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges.

Petitioners seek a stay of the administrative order removing them from this

country. Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 18, this court may grant a

stay pending our review of an administrative decision. Petitioners have not filed

a petition for review, but even if we were to construe their current pleadings as

such a petition, it would be to no effect as we would have no jurisdiction over it.1

Appellate Case: 07-9577 Document: 010170586 Date Filed: 11/16/2007 Page: 1
(...continued) 1

substance, a habeas petition, which would, in any event, be disallowed in this

situation by statute, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(9).

-2-

First, under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1) “[t]he petition for review must be filed

no later than 30 days after the date of the final order of removal.” Petitioners’

final order of removal was entered approximately eight years ago. Second, under

8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(2) “[t]he petition for review shall be filed with the court of

appeals for the judicial circuit in which the immigration judge completed the

proceedings.” According to the pleadings, the immigration judge who “completed

the proceedings” was located in El Paso, Texas. Thus, even if we were to

construe the current pleadings as a petition for review, it would be untimely and it

should have been filed in the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. 

Consequently, we DISMISS the petition for lack of jurisdiction and DENY

the motion for stay as moot.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 07-9577 Document: 010170586 Date Filed: 11/16/2007 Page: 2