FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T J ULY 27, 2010 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 0 9- 15 23 7 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Age nc y Nos . A07 3- 04 8- 44 5 A07 3- 04 8- 44 4 DEEPAK PRATAPRAI TOTLAN I, HEENA D EEPAK TOT LANI, MANSI DEEPAK TOTLA NI, CHANDNI DEEPAK T OTLANI, Pet it io ne rs , ve rs us U.S. ATTO RNEY GENERAL, Res po nd en t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w of aDeci si on of t he Bo ardof I m

m ig rat io n Ap pe al s

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (J ul y 27 , 20 10 ) Befo re TJ OFLAT, W ILSON an d P RYOR, Ci rcu itJu dg es .PER CURI AM:

Deep akPrat ap rai Tot la ni an d h is fam il y , nat iv es an d c it iz en s o f In di a, pe ti ti on th is Co urt t o re vi ew th e d eci si on of t he Bo ardof I m m ig rat io n Ap pe al s t ha t de ni edTot la ni ’s m ot io n t o re op en . In the m ot io n, To tl an i an d h is fam il y so ug ht
can cel la ti on of r em ov al an d a dju st m en t o f st atus . The Bo ardfou ndth atth e Tot la ni s’ fai lure ei th er t o wi th dr aw th ei r reque stforvo lu nt ary de pa rtu re o r m ov e to reo pe n b efo re the ir 6 0- day de pa rtu re p eri odex pi redm ad e th em in el ig ib le for th e rel ie f th ey

so ug ht . See 8 U.S.C. § 1 22 9c (d )(1 )(B) . W e d en y th e p et it io n. Tot la ni pre se nt s t hr ee ar gu m en ts , bu t we l ackjuri sd ic ti on to co ns id er two o f th os e arg um en ts . Totl an i ar gu es th atth e o rd er t o d ep artvo lu nt ari ly w as withd rawnauto m at ic al ly becau se hi s fa m il y fai le d t o p os t a d ep artur e b on d, wh ic h
en ti tl edth e fam il y

to 90 da y s i ns te adof 6 0 d ay s t o m ov e to reo pe n. To tl an i al so arg ue s t ha t h is fam il y

rece iv edth ree a dd it io na l d ay s t o d ep artvo lu nt ari ly becau se th e Bo ardm ai le d i ts de ci si on , andhi s fa m il y ti m el y withd rew the ir r eque stto de pa rt v ol un ta ril y

withi n t ha t en la rg edpe rio d. To tl an i d idno t p res en t the se two arg um en ts to th e Bo ard , and“ ab se nta co gn iz ab le ex cu se or e xc ep ti on , ‘ we la ck juri sd ic ti on to co ns id er cl ai m s t ha t h av e n otbe enrai se d b efo re the [Bo ard ]. ’” Am ay a-Artun du ag a v . U.S. Att’y Gen., 4 63 F.3d12 47 , 12 50 (11 thCir . 20 06 ) (quo ti ng Sund ar v . INS, 32 8 F .3d13 20 , 13 23 (11 thCir . 20 03 )). Alt ern at iv el y , we 2al so ag ree wi th th e g ov ern m en t tha t the se arg um en ts are m eri tl es s.

Tot la ni arg ue s t he Bo ardab us edit s d is cret io n wh enitde ni edas u nt im el y Tot la ni ’s m ot io n t o re op enba se d o n i ne ffec ti ve ass is ta nc e o f co un se l, b utwe di sa gr ee. An a li enm ay

fil e o ne m ot io n t o re op en , andth atm ot io n m us t b e fi le d withi n 9 0 d ay s o f th e o rd er o f rem ov al . 8 U.S.C. § § 1 22 9a (c)( 7) (A), (C)( i); 8 C.F.R. § 10 03 .2(c )(2 ). Tot la ni ch al le ng edth e eff ect iv en es s o f co un se l i n h is

“ Reb ut ta l Br ie f an d S up pl em en t,” n otinhi s m ot io n t o re op en . The b rie f, whi ch
was fil edsev eral m on th s af te r th e li m it at io n p eri odex pi red , als o c on ta in edno ex pl an at io n fo r Tot lani ’s del ay in pu rs ui ng hi s cl ai m

of i ne ffec ti ve ne ss . Totl an i
no w arg ue s t ha t h e o m it te d t he cla im fro m hi s m ot io n b ecau se of “ ch an ge s i n rel ev an t ca se law,” b utwe wil l n otco ns id er h is arg um en t fo r th e fi rs t t im e o n ap pe al . See Am ay a-Artun du ag a, 46 3 F .3dat 1 25 0. Th e Bo arddi d n otab us e it s di sc ret io n wh enitde te rm in edth atth e cl ai m of i ne ffec ti ve ass is ta nc e was “ a n ew, se pa rat e, an d d is ti nc t b as is forreo pe ni ng .” Tot la ni ’s m ot io n was un ti m el y an d d id
no t warran t equi tabl e to ll in g o f th e li m it at io n p eri od . See Ab di v. U.S. Att ’y Gen., 43 0 F .3d11 48 , 11 50 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ); s ee al so Ani n v . Ren o, 1 88 F.3d12 73 , 12 78 –7 9 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 9)
. Tot la ni ’s pet it io n fo r rev ie w is DENIE D
.

3