Jose Argueta-Iglesias v. Eric Holder, Jr.


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [11-60083 Dismissed for lack of Jurisdiction] Judge: EHJ , Judge: ECP , Judge: JWE Mandate pull date is 12/27/2011 [11-60083]

Download PDF
Case: 11-60083 Document: 00511655553 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/04/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 11-60083 Summary Calendar November 4, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JOSE LUIS ARGUETA-IGLESIAS, Petitioner v. ERIC HOLDER, JR., U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A024 810 629 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and PRADO and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jose Luis Argueta-Iglesias, a native and citizen of El Salvador who entered this country in 1982, filed a petition for review on August 30, 2010, seeking to challenge the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (BIA) May 20, 2010 dismissal of his appeal from the denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal, as well as the BIA’s August 19, 2010 denial of his motion to reopen. We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s May 20, 2010 decision because the instant petition for review is timely filed only as to the denial of his motion to * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. Case: 11-60083 Document: 00511655553 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/04/2011 No. 11-60083 reopen. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1). However, the only issue that Argueta arguably briefs regarding the motion to reopen is whether the BIA erred by failing to consider the argument that his failure to file his asylum application within one year of his entering the United States should be excused. The nature of the argument that Argueta raises in his petition for review is different from what he presented to the BIA in his motion to reopen. Because he did not raise this argument before the BIA, it is unexhausted, and we lack jurisdiction to review this issue. See Omari v. Holder, 562 F.3d 314, 318-19 (5th Cir. 2009). Although Argueta requests that we consider his asylum application “nunc pro tunc,” he has not shown any basis for ignoring the jurisdictional and filing requirements and considering his application almost 28 years after it should have been filed. The petition for review is DISMISSED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?