F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T KN AR I K V AR UZ HA NI S HA B OY AN , a/k/ aK na r i k V a ruz ha ni P e tr os y a n, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 11- 71574 A ge nc yN o. A 075- 306- 631 ORDER

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d t o M ot i ons P a ne l J une 28, 2011 B efo re: C A N B Y , G O U L D , an d T A L L M A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P et i t i on erK nari k V aruzhani S habo yan, a nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f A rm eni a, p e t i t i o n s f

o rr e v i e w o f

a n i n t e r i m o r d e ro f

th e B o a r d o f

I m m i g r a t i o n Ap p e a l s ( B I A) denyi ng her m ot i on for ast ayof re m ov al pend i ng consi dera t i on by the B IA of her m ot i on t o r e ope n. O urj ur i s di c t i on i s gove rne d by8 U . S . C . § 1252. W e ha ve ju r is d ic tio n to d e te rm in e w h e th e rju r is d ic tio n e x is ts . Flo r e s -Mi r a m o n te s v . I NS , 

# FI LED JU N 29 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

212 F . 3d 1133, 1135 ( 9th C i r . 2000) . W e di s m i s s the pe t i t i on f orl a c k of j ur i s di c t i on. W e m a y r e v ie w o n lyf

in a l o r d e r s o f

r e m o v a l. A lcala v. H

older , 563 F . 3d 1 0 0 9 , 1 0 1 5 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) ; L o p ez - R u izv . A s h c r o

ft , 29 8 F . 3d 88 6, 88 7 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 2 ) ; see a l

so 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2(a) (1) ( re fe rr i ng t o “ [j ] ud i ci al re vi ew of a f i nal order of re m ov al ”) ; § 1 25 2(b)(9) (r ef erri ng t o “

j ud i ci al re vi ew of a f

i nal order un der thi s s ec t i on ”) . T he control l i ng qu es t i on , then, i s w hether the B IA order ch allen g ed h er e, an in terim o rd erd en yin g a s tay o f r em o v al p en d in g th e B IA ’s d i sp o si t i o n o f S h ab o yan ’ s m o t i o n t o reo p en , i s a “ fi n al o rd er o f rem o v al ” th atm ay, w i thoutm or e , gi ve r i s e t o ape t i t i on f orr e vi e w . W e c onc l ude tha ti tm a ynot , but th a t it, lik e o th e rin te r im B I A o r d e r s , m a yb e r e v ie w e d o n lya s p a rt o f ap e titio n to r e vi e w a“ f

i na l or de rof

r e m ova l ” s uc h a s the de ni a l of am ot i on t o r e ope n. T he I m m i gr a t i on a nd N a t i ona l i tyA c t( I N A ) , w hi c h w a s a m e nde d i n 1996 by the I l l e ga l I m m i gr a t i on R e f orm a nd I m m i gr a ntR e s pons i bi l i tyA c t( I I R I R A ) , P ub. L . N o. 10 4-20 8, 11 0 S t at . 30 09 (S ept . 30 , 19 96 ), do es no texpl i ci t l y def i ne the t erm

“ fi nal order of re m ov al . ” H ow ever , IN A § 1 01 (a )( 47 ) does def i ne the t erm “ order o f d e p o rta tio n ” a n d e s tab lis h e s w h e n s u c h a n o r d e rb e c o m e s f in a l: (A ) T he t erm “ order of deport at i on ” m eans the order of the spec i al i nqui ry of

f i c e r , orothe rs uc h a dm i ni s tr a t i ve of f i c e rt o w hom the A tt orne y G e ne r a l ha s de l e ga t e d the r e s pons i bi l i tyf orde t e rm i ni ng3

w h e th e ra n a lie n is d e p o rtab le , c o n c lu d in gth a t th e a lie n is de p o r ta b le ororde r i ng de

por tat i on . (B ) T he order desc ri bed u nd ersubp ar agraph (A ) s hal l becom e f i nal up on the earl i erof—

( i) ad e te rm in a tio n b yth e B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls a f f i rm i ng s uc h or de r ; or ( ii) th e e x p ir a tio n o f

th e p e r io d in w h ic h th e a lie n is pe rm i tt e d t o s e e k r e vi e w of s uc h or de rbythe B oa r d of Im m i g rat i o n A p p eal s. 8 U . S . C . § 1101( a ) ( 47) ( e m pha s i s a dde d) . B e c aus e I I R I R A e l i m i na t e d the d is tin c tio n b e tw e e n “e x c lu s io n ” a n d “d e p o rta tio n ” p r o c e e d in g s a n d r e p la c e d b o th w ith as in g le “r e m o v a l” p r o c e e d in g , s e e, e . g. , 8 U .S .C . § § 1 2 2 9

– 1 2 2 9 c , th is prov i si on al so funct i on al l y def i nes a“ fi nal order of re m ov al . ” L olon g v. G on zales , 484 F . 3d 1173, 1177 n. 2 ( 9th C i r . 2007) ( e n banc ) ( hol di ng tha ti n the c ont e xtof IN A § 1 01 (a )( 47 ), “ the t erm s ‘ depo rt abl e’ and ‘ depo rt at i on ’ can b e use d in te r c h a n g e ab lyw ith th e te rm s ‘r e m o v ab le ’ a n d ‘r e m o v a l,’ r e s p e c tiv e ly ” ) ; Si ng h v. G on zales , 4 9 9 F .3 d 9 6 9 , 9 7 9 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ) ( ap p ly in g I N A § 1 0 1 ( a ) ( 4 7 ) ( A ) to d e f in e “o r d e ro f

r e m o v a l” ) . T h e “s p e c ia l in q u iryo f f ic e r ” r e f e r e n c e d b yth is p r o v is io n is a n im m ig r a tio n ju d g e p r e s id in g o v e rr e m o v a l p r o c e e d in g s . N or i egaL o p ezv . A s h c r o

ft , 3 3 5 F. 3 d 8 7 4 , 8 8 3 & n . 7 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 3 ) ( c i t i n g 8 C. F. R. § 1 .1 ( l) ) .4

U nd erthi s def

i ni t i on , the B IA ’ s i nt er i m order denyi ng a s t ayof re m ov al pend i ng re sol ut i on of S habo yan’ s m ot i on t o reopen canno tqu al i fyas a “ fi nal order of re m ov al . ” T he order does not “ concl ud [e ] thatthe al i en i s deport abl e, ” nor do es i t“ or de r [ ] de port a t i on. ” 8 U . S . C . § 1101( a ) ( 47) ( A ) . M or e ove r , the f i na l or de rof re m ov al i n thi s c as e has al re ady i ss ued. T he B IA ’ s s ub se qu enti nt er i m order d e n y in g as ta y o f

r e m o v a l w o u ld b e c o n s id e r e d a“f in a l o r d e ro f

r e m o v a l” o n lyif

it i s s o “ i nextri cabl y l i nk ed” t o the previ ou s r em ov al order thata grantof re l i ef w o u ld r e n d e rth e o r ig in a l o r d e rin v a lid . Se e Mo r a le s -I z q u i e rdo v . DH

S , 600 F . 3d 10 76 , 10 82 –8 3 (9th C i r. 20 10 ). B utthati s notthe ca se . E ven i f S habo yan w er e gr a nt e d the s t a y of

r e m ova l , the or de rgr a nt i ng tha ts t a yw oul d nota tt a c k the v a lid ityo f

th e u n d e r ly in g r e m o v a l o r d e r . D h a n g u v . I NS , 8 1 2 F .2 d 4 5 5 , 4 5 9 ( 9 th C i r . 1987) ( “ T he gr a nt i ng of as t a ype ndi ng the B I A ’ s c ons i de r a t i on of the m ot i on t o r e ope n di d nota tt a c k the de port a t i on or de ri t s e l f , norw a s i tade t e rm i na t i on on w hi c h the f

i na l or de rof

de port a t i on w a s c ont i nge nt . ” ( i nt e rna l c i t a t i on & qu ot at i on s om i tt ed)) . T hi s i s nott o saythatthe B IA ’ s orderdenyi ng a s t ayof re m ov al can n ever be re vi ew ed by a c ou rtof appeal s. T he IN A do es no tabsol ut el y pre cl ud e r evi ew of s uc h or de r s , i ts i m pl y c ons ol i da t e s “ [ j ] udi c i a l r e vi e w of

a l l que s t i ons of

l a w a nd fa ct. . . ar i si ng fr om any a ct i on t aken or proceedi ng brou gh tt o rem ov e an al i en5

f r o m th e U n ite d S ta te s ” in to as in g le p e titio n f o rr e v ie w o f

af in a l o r d e ro f

r e m o v a l. 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 ( b ) ( 9 ) ; s e e al s o Si ngh , 4 9 9 F .3 d a t 9 7 7

– 7 8 & n .1 1 ; R eno v. A me r i c a n -A r a b A n t i -Dis c r i mi n a t i o n C o mm . , 525 U . S . 471, 485 ( 1999) ( hol di ng thatt o the ext entdi sc re t i on ary det erm i nat i on s l i ke re fusa l t o g ranta s t ayar e

“ r e vi e w abl e a ta l l , the y a tl e a s tw i l l notbe m a de the ba s e s f ors e pa r a t e r ounds of j udi c i a l i nt e rve nt i on out s i de the s tr e a m l i ne d pr oc e s s tha tC ongr e s s ha s de s i gne d” ( i nt e rna l c i t a t i ons & quot a t i ons om i tt e d) ) . T hus , the B I A ’ s or de rde ny i ng S haboy a n’ s r e que s tf

oras t a y w oul d s t i l l be r e vi e w abl e a s pa rtof ape t i t i on f

or r e v ie w s te m m in g f

r o m af in a l o r d e ro f

r e m o v a l. Se e L o

p ez - R u iz , 298 F . 3d a t887 ( obs e rvi ng tha tape t i t i on f orr e vi e w of

af i na l or de rof

r e m ova l m a ys e e k r e vi e w of

“ any groun d w hi ch [the pet i t i on er ] has r ai se d b ef ore the B IA before the fi nal order of r e m ova l ” ) . I n the pr e s e ntc a s e , how e ve r , the pe t i t i one rdoe s nots e e k r e vi e w of the B I A ’ s de ni a l of

as t a y a s pa rtof

the r e vi e w of

af i na l or de rof

r e m ova l ; s he s e e k s r e v i e w o f

th e d e n i a l o f

as t a ya s a n i n d e p e n d e n tm a tt e r . F o rs u c h r e v i e w w e la c kju r is d ic tio n . A l l pend i ng m ot i on s are deni ed as m oo t . T he t em po raryst ayof re m ov al w i l l t erm i nat e upo n i ss uance of the m andat e. DI S MI S S E D.6 C o uns e lLi s t i ng P et erS i ng h, P et erS i ng h & A ss oci at es , P . C . , F re sno, C al i forni a, for the pet i t i on er . M onaM a r i aY ous i f

, T r i a l A tt orne y , U . S . D e pa rtm e ntof J us t i c e , C i vi l D i vi s i on, O f f ic e o f I m m ig r a tio n L itig a tio n , W a s h in g to n , D .C ., f o rth e r e s p o n d e n t.