[DO N OT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 10 70 8 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Agen cy No. A0 96 -0 82 -4 35 ANTONIO SEGU

NDO OLIVE ROS,
Pet it io ne r,

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

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Au gu st14 , 20 12 ) Befo re TJ OFLAT, AN DERSON an d EDMONDSON, Ci rcu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM:

Case: 11-10708 Date Filed: 08/14/2012 Page: 1 of 4Ant on io Seg un do Oli ve ro s, a n at iv e an d c it iz enof Ve ne zu el a, se ek s re vi ew

of th e Bo ardof I m

m ig rat io n Ap pe al s’ (“ BIA”) de ni al of h is Decem be r 20 10 m ot io n t o re op enrem ov al pro ceed in gs aft er i t co nc lu de d t ha t i t d idno t h av e juri sd ic ti on to co ns id er the m ot io n p ur su an t t o 8 C.F.R. § 10 03 .2(d ) - th e reg ul at ory

po st -d ep artur e b ar. Pu rs ua ntto a rem ov al ord er, Oli ve ro s was rem ov ed fro m th e Uni te d S ta te s i n J anuary 20 07 . Later t ha t year, he i ll eg al ly reent eredth e Uni te d S tate s. Oli ve ro s n ow ar gu es th at : (1 ) th e BIA ab us edit s d is cret io n i n de nyin g h is m ot io n t o re op endu e to a la ck of ju ris di ct io n b ecau se th e reg ul at ory po st -d ep artur e b ar i m

pr op erl y co nt ract s the BIA’s st atut ory juri sd ic ti on to co ns id er m ot io ns to reo pe n a ndco nt rav en es th e Imm ig rat io n a ndNati on al it y Act (“ INA”); an d (2 ) th e BIA’s d en ia l o f hi s m ot io n t o re op envi ol at edth e 1 95 1 Uni te d Nat io ns Co nv en ti on Rel at in g t o t he Sta tu s o f Ref ug ees (“ UN Co nv en ti on ”), an d t he 19 67 Uni te d Nat io ns Pro to co l Re la ti ng to th e St atus of Refu ge es (“ UN Prot oc ol ”).

I. Reg ul at or y Po st -Depa rtur e Ba r W e rev ie w th e BIA’s d en ia l o f a m ot io n t o re op enforanab us e o f di sc ret io n, an d a ny un de rlyin g l eg al de te rm in at io ns de no vo . Liv. U.S. Att ’y Gen
. , 48 8 F .3d13 71 , 13 74 (11 th Cir . 20 07 ). Rev ie w of the de ni al of am ot io n t o re op en is li m it edto de te rm in in g wh ethe r th ere h as be enanex erci se of a dm in is tra ti ve 2 Case: 11-10708 Date Filed: 08/14/2012 Page: 2 of 4di sc ret io n a ndwhethe r th atex erci se was arb it rary or cap ric io us . Aliv. U.S. Att ’y

Gen
. , 44 3 F .3d80 4, 8 08 (11 thCir . 20 06 ). If anali enreen te rs th e Uni te d S tate s i ll eg al ly after h av in g b eenrem ov ed pu rs ua ntto a rem ov al ord er, the rem ov al ord er i s re in st at edfro m it s o rig in al da te an d i s n otsubjec t t o b ei ng reo pe ne d. INA § 24 1( a)(5 ), 8 U.S.C. § 12 31 (a)( 5) ; Se e 1 De Sa ndov al

v. U.S. Att ’y Gen
. , 44 0 F .3d12 76 , 12 79 -8 1 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 6) . In De San do va l, we n ot edth at§ 1 23 1( a)(5 ) ap pl ie s t o a ll ali en s wh o re en te r il le ga ll y . Id. at12 79 . W e uph el d the Att orne y Gene ral ’s autho rity

inpro m ul ga ti ng 8 C.F .R. § 24 1.8 , whi chpro vi de s tha t an ali enwho reen te rs il le ga ll y ha s n o ri gh t t o ahe ari ng be fo re an imm ig rat io n ju dg e an d d el eg at es th e d et erm in at io n o f rem ov ab il it y to an imm ig rat io n o ffi cer. Id
. at 1 28 0- 81 . Bec au se th e INA an d i ts in te rp ret in g re gu la ti on s d ep riv es th e BIA o f au th or ity to reo pe n re m ov al pro ceed in gs wher e anali enha s i ll eg al ly reent eredth e Uni te d S tate s af

te r be in g re m ov edun de r a rem ov al ord er, the BIA’s co nc lu si on Section 1231(a) (5) pr ovides: 1 Reinstatement of re moval order s ag ainst aliens illeg ally ree ntering I f the Attorney Gene ral finds that an alien has reenter ed the United S tates i l l ega l l y afte r having been remove d or having depar ted voluntarily , under an order of remova l, the prior order o f re m o val is reinstated from its orig inal date and is not subject to being reope ned or revie wed, the alien is not elig ible and may not apply for any relief under this chapter, a

nd the alien sha ll be remove d under the prior orde r at a ny time afte r the re entry . 3 Case: 11-10708 Date Filed: 08/14/2012 Page: 3 of 4th atitlac ke d juris di ct io n t o c on si de r Oli ve ro s’ m ot io n t o re op enwas m an da te d b y

st atut e. Acco rd in gl y , it s d en ia l o f Oli ve ro s’ m ot io n t o re op endi d n otim pr op erl y co nt ractit s s ta tu to ril y

co nf erre d juris di ct io n t o c on si de r m ot io ns to reo pe n o r co nt rav en e th e INA, an d i t d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n wh enitde ni edth e m ot io n. W e, th eref

or e, de ny thi s cl ai m .

II . UN Conv enti on an d UN Proto co l W e rev ie w ou r subjec t m at te r juri sd ic ti on de no vo . Amaya -Art un du ag a v . U.S. Att ’y Gen
. , 46 3 F .3d12 47 , 12 50 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ). W e d o n otha ve juri sd ic ti on to co ns id er an y cla im s tha t an ali enha s n otfir stpre se nt edto th e BIA. Id . Becau se Oli ve ro s fa il edto rai se hi s UN Co nv en ti onan d UN Pro to co l cl ai m be fo re the BIA, we do no t h av e juri sd ic ti on to co ns id er i t. Acco rd in gl y , we di sm is s thi s cl ai m . Afte r car efu l an d t ho ro ug h re vi ew of th e adm in is tra ti ve reco rdan d t he pa rti es ’ br ie fs , we den y

Oli ve ro s’ pet it io n fo r rev ie w inpa rt, anddi sm is s i t i n p art . PETI TI ON DENI ED, IN PART, AND DISMI SSED I N PART.

4 Case: 11-10708 Date Filed: 08/14/2012 Page: 4 of 4