Court Opinion

ID: 9883013
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 00:00:31.699893+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:17:19.050422
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-60663      Document: 00516922382         Page: 1    Date Filed: 10/05/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit                        United States Court of Appeals
                                                                         Fifth Circuit

                                 ____________                          FILED
                                                                 October 5, 2023
                                    22-60663
                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
                                 ____________                          Clerk

   Sajid Muhammad Qureishy,

                                                            Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                       versus

   Merrick garland, U.S. Attorney General,

                                             Defendant—Appellee.
                   ______________________________

                      Petition for Review of an Order of the
                          Board of Immigration Appeals
                               BIA No. A096 090 43
                   ______________________________

   Before Graves, Higginson, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          Sajid Muhammad Qureishy, a native and citizen of Pakistan, petitions
   for review of an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming denial
   of asylum and withholding of removal. Qureishy argues that his asylum
   application, although untimely filed, falls within an exception permitting late
   applications when justified by extraordinary circumstances. He further

          _____________________
          *
            Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
   circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 22-60663      Document: 00516922382         Page: 2    Date Filed: 10/05/2023

                                     22-60663

   contends that he established a case for asylum on the merits by showing both
   past and future persecution. Finally, he contends that because the notice to
   appear informing him of removal proceedings lacked a date and time, this
   court should remand to give the government a chance to cure the defect.
   Because these arguments have been inadequately briefed, we deny the
   petition for review.
          An appellant’s opening brief must contain his “contentions and the
   reasons for them, with citations to the authorities and parts of the record on
   which the appellant relies.” Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8). The brief must also
   engage with the merits of the judgment being appealed. See Brinkmann v.
   Dallas Cty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987) (refusing
   to “raise and discuss legal issues that [appellant] has failed to assert” where
   appellant did not address a district court’s opinion). “Inadequately briefed
   issues are deemed abandoned.” United States v. Stevens, 487 F.3d 232, 244
   (5th Cir. 2007). See also Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993)
   (“[W]e . . . require that arguments must be briefed to be preserved.”).
          Qureishy has not adequately briefed the issues he raises. The Board
   considered and rejected Qureishy’s arguments concerning the timeliness of
   his petition, his case for persecution, and the defective notice to appear. Yet
   Qureishy never discusses the Board’s analysis or explains why it was
   deficient. Not once does he even state why the Board rejected his arguments.
   All he provides are “familiar rules governing our review . . . without even the
   slightest identification of any error” in the Board’s reasoning. Brinkmann,
   813 F.2d at 748. It is “the same as if he had not appealed that judgment.” Id.
          Another fatal defect in Qureishy’s briefing is the lack of record
   citations. Factual assertions made in a brief must be supported by record
   citations. See Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8). See also United States v. Rojas, 812
   F.3d 382, 407 n.15 (5th Cir. 2016) (Appellant “does not include record

                                         2
Case: 22-60663       Document: 00516922382            Page: 3   Date Filed: 10/05/2023

                                        22-60663

   citations in support of these arguments. He has failed to adequately brief
   these arguments.”). Qureishy makes multiple factual assertions regarding all
   three of his arguments.        Nevertheless, he cites the record only when
   discussing the persecution issue, and then only three times over two pages of
   facts. Absent are citations for Qureishy’s most salient assertions, such as his
   justification for failing to file a timely petition.
          Because Qureishy inadequately briefs these issues, he abandons them.
   And because he abandons them, we cannot consider their merits. The
   petition is accordingly denied.

                                             3