Court Opinion

ID: 9910614
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-16 01:00:47.699727+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:53:30.589997
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-60818        Document: 00517004316             Page: 1      Date Filed: 12/15/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 21-60818
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                              December 15, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   Jose Luis Morales-Cardoso,                                                         Clerk

                                                                                 Petitioner,

                                            versus

   Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General,

                                                                               Respondent.
                     ______________________________

                        Petition for Review of an Order of the
                            Board of Immigration Appeals
                              Agency No. A076 596 991
                     ______________________________

   Before Higginbotham, Stewart, and Southwick, Circuit
   Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Jose Luis Morales-Cardoso, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions
   for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying
   his motion for reconsideration. We review the BIA’s decision “under a

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 21-60818     Document: 00517004316           Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/15/2023

                                    No. 21-60818

   highly deferential abuse-of-discretion standard.” Singh v. Gonzales, 436 F.3d
   484, 487 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
          Morales-Cardoso argues that based on Niz-Chavez v. Garland, 141 S.
   Ct. 1474 (2021), and Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018), a notice to
   appear (NTA) is defective, and does not convey jurisdiction to an
   immigration court, if the NTA fails to provide the hearing date and time. He
   acknowledges that his jurisdictional challenge regarding the NTA is
   foreclosed under circuit precedent, but he wishes to preserve the issue for
   further review and contends that this case warrants remand so that the BIA
   may further consider the effects of Pereira and Niz-Chavez.
          Circuit precedent forecloses his jurisdictional argument. See Castillo-
   Gutierrez v. Garland, 43 F.4th 477, 480 (5th Cir. 2022); Maniar v. Garland,
   998 F.3d 235, 242 (5th Cir. 2021). The regulations, rather than 8 U.S.C.
   § 1229(a), “govern what a notice to appear must contain to constitute a valid
   charging document.” Maniar, 998 F.3d at 242 (internal quotation marks and
   citation omitted).    Under the regulations, an NTA “is sufficient to
   commence proceedings even if it does not include the time, date, or place of
   the initial hearing.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
   Because the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying on the merits the
   motion for reconsideration, we need not consider Morales-Cardoso’s
   remaining arguments. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (“As
   a general rule courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues
   the decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach.”).
          The petition for review is DENIED.

                                         2