T h i s o p i n i o n w a s r e l e a s e d i n i t i a l l y i n t y p e s c r i p t f o r m.  

## I n t he 

# U n ited S ta te s C o u r t o f A p p e a ls

F o r th e S e v e n th C ircu it

____________ N os. 04

- 2055 , 05

- 2824 A HMAD A L -M ARBU , P etitio ner , v . M ICHAEL B . M UKASE Y , A t t or ney General o fthe U ni t ed St at es, Res pond e nt
.

____________ Pe tition s for Rev iew ofan O rde r of the Boar d o f I mmigrationA pp eals
. No . A 79-546- 194

____________ O N M OT I ON T O S T AYT HE M ANDA TE

____________ A PRIL 24 , 20 08 

____________
R IPPLE , Cir cu i t Judg e ( in ch am bers). Th is m att er i s before m e o n the pet i t i oner ’ s “ M oti on t o St ay the M andat e o f Pa ne l ’ s Or der , Pe ndi ng Pe t i t i o n f o r W r i to fCe r t i o r ar i , a nd Requestf or ‘U nopposed’ 30 Day Exte nsi on t o Fi l e S up ple

m ent al Br i e f , ” f i l e d o n Apr i l 2 , 2 0 0 8
. F o r the r e a s o n set forth in this ch am bers op inion, I de ny the requ ested relief
.2 N os. 04

- 2055 , 05

- 2824 A . O n M ar c h 26 , 200 8, w e d en ied p etition er A h m ad A lM arbu’ s pet i t i o n f o r r eh ea r ing an d pe t i t i o n f o r r eh ea r i ng en banc. The m andat e was sc hedu l ed t o i ssue on Ap ri l 2, 2008 , butthe f i l i ng o fthi s m ot i on t o st ay o n thatday has st aye d t em pora ri l y the m andat e. M r. A l

- M arbu see ks a stay ofthis cou rt ’s m an d ate p en d ing a pe ti ti on for a w rit of ce rtiora ri to the Su p re m e C ou rt. H e a lso req u es ts 30 da y s t o f i l e a br i efi n s uppo r to fthe m oti on to st aythe m an dat e; he e xpl ai ns tha the di d not h ave s uf f i ci en t tim e to p re p ar e th e p re se n t m otion
.
“ W he n a p a r t y a s k s thi s c o ur tt o s t a y i t s man da t e p e nd

in g th e filin g of a p etition for a w rit of c er tiora ri, th at p ar ty m ustsho w thatthe pet i t i on wil l p resenta subst ant i al quest i on and that t here i s goo d c ause f or a stay .” Books v. C ity of E lk ha rt , 239 F.3d 82 6, 82 7 (7 th C ir. 20 01 ) ( R i p p le, J., i n ch am b er s), ci t i ngF e d
. R
. Ap p . P
. 4 1 ( d ) ( 2 ) ( A)
. The g r a n t o f a mo t i o n t o s t a y th e ma n d a t e “ i s f a r f r o m a f o r eg o ne co nc l us i o n. ” 16 A Cha r l es Al an W r i g ht , Arthur R. M iller & E d w ar d H . C oo p er , Fed eral P rac tice an d P roc edu re § 39 87 ( 3d ed. 19 99)
. I nst ead, the par t y s eek i ng the st ay m ustdem onst rate both “a re aso nabl e pr obab i l i t y o f su cc ee di ng o n the mer i t s” a nd “ i r r epa r ab l e i nj ur y absent a s t ay. ” B ri cklayer s Local 21 v. B a n n er Rest oration, Inc. , 384 F.3d 911, 912 (7th C ir . 2 0 04) (Ripp le, J
. , i n ch am bers); s e e al s o W i l l i am s v. Chrans , 50 F. 3d 1358 , 13 60 ( 7th Cir
. 19 95) (per cu riam ); U ni t e d Sta tes v. H ol l and , 1 F.3d 45 4, 45 6 (7 th Ci r . 1 99 3) ( Ri ppl e, J
. , i n c ha m bers)
. I n o r der t o de m o nstra te a re as on ab le p ro b ab ility of su c c ee d in g on th e m er its ofthe pro posed cer t i or ar i pet i t i on, the appli can tm ust s h o w a rea so n ab le p ro b ab ility tha t fou r Ju stic es w ill vote t o gr antcer t i or ari and a “ f ai r pros pect ” thatf i ve J ust i ces w ill vote to rev er se the j u d gm en t of th is c ou rt. See Ca li

-N os. 04

- 2055 , 05

- 2824 3 f or nia v. Am
. St or e s Co. , 49 2 U.S
. 13 01, 13 07 ( 1989 ) (O ’C on n or , J. , i n ch am b er s); see also U nited Sta tes v. Wa rner , 507 F.3d 508, 511 (7th Cir. 2007 ) (W ood , J., in ch am bers); Wi l l i a ms , 5 0 F
. 3d at1 36 0. W e co ns i der the i ssues tha tthe appl i ca ntpl an s t o r ai se i n the c er t i o r ar i pe t i t ion i n the co nt ex to fthe c as e hi st o r y , t he S upr eme Co ur t ’ s t r ea t m en t of othe r cases p resen ti ng sim il ar i ssu es an d the cons id erat i o ns tha tg ui de the S upr eme Co ur ti n de t er m ining w h eth er to issu e a w r i t o f ce rtiora ri. Wi l l i a ms , 50 F. 3d at 13 61
. I n at t em pt t o dem onst ra t e thata pet i t i on f or a w rito f cer t i or ar i would pre senta re aso nabl e pr obab i l i t y o f su cc ee ding on t he mer i t s, c o uns el l i st s the f i ve que st i o ns t hathe wil l r ai se i n the pet ition : (1) wh ether the def ect i ve t ri al t ra nscri p t pr ej ud i ced hi s a bi l i t y pr oper l y t o appeal hi s ca se and const i t ut ed a deni al o fDue P ro cess ; (2) w h eth er th i s c o u rt d en ied h is D u e P ro c es s rig h ts “to have j uri sdic t i on t o consi der” th e m eri t s o fhi s ca se; ( 3) wh ether t he co urtunconst i t ut i onal l y deni ed j uri sdic

t i o n b as ed o n the de ci si o n i n A li v. G o nz a les , 50 2 F
. 3d 65 9 (7 th C ir. 20 07 ), cert. denied sub n o m . Ali v . M uk a sey , ___ S
. Ct
. ___ , No. 0 7- 79 8, 2 00 8 W L 1 69 94 78 ( Apr. 1 4, 2008); ( 4) w he ther the IJ ’ s den i al o fhi s se co nd mot i o n t o c o nt i nu e th e t r i a l c o n s t i t u t e d a n a b u s e o fd i s c r e t i o n ; a nd ( 5) wh ether t he c ou rt ’ s s t ay ofr em ova l equi t abl y t ol l ed h is v olu n tary d ep ar tu re p er iod . C ou n se l a r g u es , i n es se n c e, th at ou r h old in g th at w e la c ke d j u ris d iction to re vi e w the IJ ’ s de ni a l o fthe mo t i o n f o r c o nt i nu ance wa s b a s e d o n a mi s r e a di ngo fo ur p r e c e de nt
. He c o nt e nd s th atthe A li deci si on m i sappli ed the cour t ’ s deci si on in Subhan v. Ashcr oft , 38 3 F
. 3d 591 ( 7th Cir
. 20 04)
. The f i ve issues tha t cou ns el says he w ill raise i n the p eti ti on for a wri to fc er t i ora r i a r e the e xa cts ame fi ve i ss ue s tha the4 N os. 04

- 2055 , 05

- 2824

ra i sed i n the petition fo r re hear i ng with sugg est i on f or re hear i ng en banc. Counsel al so subm i t s thatM r. A l

- M arbu w oul d suff er irr ep arable ha rm if he w ere requ ired to leave the Cou ntry n ow be c au se h is w ife, a U n ited State s c itize n , i s c u rre n tly i n Eur o pe se ek i ng a dva nc ed m edi ca l a t t en t i o n, a nd he i s t he s o l e cus t o di an o fthe i r two c hi l dr en . He off er s no f ur t he r de t ai ls rega r di ng hi s wi f e’ s m edi ca l ne eds , the l ength ofher st ay, o r w h eth er there ar e o ther ar ra ngem ent s thatco u ld be m ade with re spectt o the chi l dren or the ir trav el.
B. I m ustco ncl ud e that M r. A l

- M arbu has notdem onst ra t ed th at h is p etition for a w rit of ce rtiora ri w o u l d p re se n t a re aso nabl e pr obab i l i t y of succee ding on the m er i t s. H e has no tde m o ns t r at ed tha thi s ca se in vo l ve s an i m po r t an t ques t i o n o ff ede r al l aw tha ts ho ul d b e se t t l ed by the Suprem e C ou rto r thathi s ca se conf l i ct s with a deci si on o fthe Su p re m e C ou rt. See S u p . C t
. R
. 1 0 ( c )
. No r h a s he ar gued thatthere exi st s a di vi si on be tw ee n the ci rcui t s. See S up. Ct
. R. 10 ( a)
. Atmos t , he a ppea r s t o a r g ue tha tthe deci si on i n hi s ca se conf l i ct s with p rior pre cedentf ro m this c i r cui t
. I n de ci di ng hi s ca se , we r el i ed upo n Aliv. G o nz a les , 502 F .3d 6 59 (7 th C ir. 2 00 7). A p etition fo r a w rit ofcer t i or ari w as f i l ed i n thatcas e o n Decem ber 12 , 20 07 an d d en ied on A p ril 14 , 200 8. A li v. M uk a sey , ___ S. C t
. ___, N o. 07

- 798, 20 08 W L 16994 78 ( A pr. 14 , 20 08)
. U nd er these ci rcum st ances, I m ustco ncl u d e thati ti s no tl i kel y that f our J ust i ces w i l l vo t e t o gr antcer t i or ar i i n thi s ca se. Fi nal l y, I se e no r eas on t o prol ong these proce edi ngs b y pe r mi t t i ng c o un s e l a n a ddi t i o na l 3 0 da y s t o f i l e a s up -N os. 04

- 2055 , 05

- 2824 5 pl em en t al b r i efi n s uppo r to fthe r eq ue stt o s t aythe m andat e. The m at t er s he in tends t o ra i se i n hi s pet i t i on f o r c er t i o r ar i ha ve b ee n e xa m i ne d tho r o ug hl y i n the pr o ce edi ng s i n thi s co ur ta nd fur the r d el ayi n the i ss ua nc e o fo ur ma nd a t e i s n o tj us t i f i e d. A ccor dingl y, I deny the m ot i on t o st ay th e m andat e. I f u r t h e r d e n y t h e r e q u e s t f o r a 3 0

- d a y e x t e n s i o n o ft i me to file a s u p p lem en tal br ief in su p p or t of th e re q u es t t o sta y th e m an d ate
. The Cle rki s dir ect ed t o i ssue the m andat e i m m edi at el y. I T I S S O OR DER ED

USCA- 02- C- 0072

— 5- 1- 08