Case Name: Patricia Ann CORDES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General; Defendant-Appellant. Tom Ridge; Nancy Alcantar, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-02-25
Citations: 517 F.3d 1094
Docket Number: No. 04-15988
Parties: Patricia Ann CORDES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General; Defendant-Appellant. Tom Ridge; Nancy Alcantar, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before: WARREN J. FERGUSON, JOHN T. NOONAN, and PAMELA ANN RYMER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 517
Pages: 1094–1097

Head Matter:
Patricia Ann CORDES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General; Defendant-Appellant. Tom Ridge; Nancy Alcantar, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 04-15988.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Feb. 25, 2008.
Jagdip Singh Sekhon, Esq., Sekhon & Sekhon, PLC, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.
USSAC-office of the U.S. Attorney, Sacramento, CA, Marianne A. Pansa, Esq., USF-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Fresno, CA, Alison R. Drucker, Esq., DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Defendant-Appellant/Respondents-Appellees.
Before: WARREN J. FERGUSON, JOHN T. NOONAN, and PAMELA ANN RYMER, Circuit Judges.
Michael B. Mukasey is substituted for his predecessor, Alberto R. Gonzales, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

Opinion:
ORDER
On June 30, 2005, the BIA sua sponte reopened the underlying proceeding, vacated its order of removal, and remanded the matter to the Immigration Judge. This stripped us of jurisdiction to enter our opinion, filed on August 24, 2005. See Lopez-Ruiz v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d 886, 887 (9th Cir.2002). This case is different from Lolong v. Gonzales, 484 F.3d 1173, 1177 (9th Cir.2007), because, here, the BIA remanded to the IJ for "further proceedings" and to enter a "new decision" regarding removal, whereas in Lolong, "[t]he BIA reversed, but rather than remanding Lolong's case to the IJ for entry of an order of removal, the BIA itself granted her voluntary departure." The remand for further proceedings is what caused us to lose jurisdiction. Otherwise, this court and the IJ would both have been considering the same thing at the same time: Cordes's removal. Although we didn't know it, this happened before the panel published its opinion. Accordingly, we now vacate our August 24, 2005 opinion and deny the pending petition for rehearing en banc as moot.