Case Name: Imad MUSA, Ahmed Musa, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General of the United States of America, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-06-25
Citations: 101 F. App'x 379
Docket Number: No. 02-4267
Parties: Imad MUSA, Ahmed Musa, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General of the United States of America, Respondent.
Judges: Before: ALITO, SMITH, and BECKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 101
Pages: 379–380

Head Matter:
Imad MUSA, Ahmed Musa, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General of the United States of America, Respondent.
No. 02-4267.
United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) June 15, 2004.
Decided June 25, 2004.
Tahani Salama, Philadelphia, PA, for Petitioner.
Susan K. Houser, Carl H. McIntyre, Jr., Richard M. Evans, Michael P. Lindemann, Douglas E. Ginsburg, John D. Williams, United States Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: ALITO, SMITH, and BECKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
PER CURIAM:
Imad Musa petitions for review of the denial by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) of his application for asylum and other relief. On February 12, 2004, the BIA ruled that, certain irregularities in the original disposition of Musa's case by the Immigration Judge (IJ) having been brought to its attention, the prior decision of the Board was to be vacated and the case remanded to the IJ "for further proceedings and for the entry of a new decision." Accordingly, there is no longer any "final order of removal" extant that this Court has jurisdiction to review. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1); Calcano-Marbinez v. INS, 533 U.S. 348, 350, 121 S.Ct. 2268, 150 L.Ed.2d 392 (2001). We therefore dismiss Musa's petition for lack of jurisdiction, without prejudice to whatever right he may have to raise his claims before this Court at a later date, should the occasion arise. Cf. Lopez-Ruiz v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d 886 (9th Cir.2002) (dismissing review petition for lack of jurisdiction where BIA has granted motion to reopen).