Ahmad Fayazi-Azad v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
This text of 792 F.2d 873 (Ahmad Fayazi-Azad v. Immigration and Naturalization Service) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
ORDER
Fayazi-Azad’s petition for review of the BIA’s order denying his application for asylum and withholding of deportation, *874 filed on May 2, 1985, is not a final order appealable in this court. On December 27, 1984, prior to filing his petition for review, Fayazi-Azad filed a motion to reopen his deportation proceedings. The BIA has not yet adjudicated Fayazi-Azad’s motion to reopen. Where a petitioner elects to file a motion to reopen before seeking judicial review, the “otherwise appealable final order becomes no longer appealable in this court until the motion is denied or the proceedings have been effectively terminated.” Hyun Joon Chung v. INS, 720 F.2d 1471, 1474 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1216, 104 S.Ct. 2659, 81 L.Ed.2d 366 (1984). Because the time for filing a petition for judicial review on the underlying order does not begin to run until the agency acts upon the motion to reopen, it is not necessary for a petitioner to file a protective appeal from the BIA’s original decision in order to preserve the issues raised therein. Id.
The petition is DISMISSED.
In order to afford Fayazi-Azad the opportunity to seek a stay of deportation from the BIA pending resolution of his motion to reopen, we stay our mandate for 30 days. See Bu Roe v. INS, 771 F.2d 1328, 1335 (9th Cir.1985).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
792 F.2d 873, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 26238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ahmad-fayazi-azad-v-immigration-and-naturalization-service-ca9-1986.