Court Opinion

ID: 9554534
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-09 15:01:05.554451+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:35:34.120136
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 23-11045   Document: 14-1      Date Filed: 08/09/2023    Page: 1 of 3

                                                  [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                   In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                          ____________________

                                No. 23-11045
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       JUAN JOSE HERNANDEZ DOMINGO,
                                                               Petitioner,
       versus
       U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

                                                              Respondent.

                          ____________________

                   Petition for Review of a Decision of the
                        Board of Immigration Appeals
                          Agency No. A098-801-117
                          ____________________
USCA11 Case: 23-11045      Document: 14-1       Date Filed: 08/09/2023     Page: 2 of 3

       2                       Opinion of the Court                  23-11045

       Before JILL PRYOR, GRANT, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              Juan Hernandez Domingo seeks review of the Department
       of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) February 21, 2023 order reinstat-
       ing his October 2005 order of removal. The government moves
       to dismiss the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction. Hernan-
       dez Domingo has not filed a response to the motion.
               The government argues that our decision in Jimenez-Morales
       v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 821 F.3d 1307 (11th Cir. 2016) has been abrogated
       by later Supreme Court decisions and, thus, Hernandez Domingo’s
       petition is untimely. Alternatively, the government argues that the
       petition is premature as the reinstatement order is not final because
       withholding-only proceedings remain pending. We need not de-
       cide whether Jimenez-Morales has been abrogated because we lack
       jurisdiction in any event.
              If the reinstatement order was final when DHS issued it on
       February 21, 2023, the petition for review is untimely and we lack
       jurisdiction to consider it. In that case, the statutory time limit re-
       quired Hernandez Domingo to file his petition for review no later
       than March 23, 2023, which was 30 days after DHS issued the Feb-
       ruary 21, 2023 reinstatement order, and Hernandez Domingo did
       not file his petition until April 3, 2023. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1)
       (“The petition for review must be filed not later than 30 days after
       the date of the final order of removal.”); Avila v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 560
       F.3d 1281, 1284 (11th Cir. 2009) (holding that an order of
USCA11 Case: 23-11045      Document: 14-1     Date Filed: 08/09/2023     Page: 3 of 3

       23-11045               Opinion of the Court                         3

       reinstatement of a removal order is reviewable on appeal as a final
       order); Chao Lin v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 677 F.3d 1043, 1045-46 (11th Cir.
       2012) (noting that the statutory time limit for filing a petition for
       review in an immigration proceeding is mandatory, jurisdictional,
       and not subject to equitable tolling). If the reinstatement order has
       not become final because the withholding-only proceedings are
       pending, the petition for review is premature and cannot invoke
       our jurisdiction. See Jimenez-Morales, 821 F.3d at 1308-09.
           Accordingly, the government’s motion to dismiss is
       GRANTED and this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.1

       1
           All other pending motions are DENIED as moot.