Francisco Leon Lux v. Jeffrey A. Rosen

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 14, 2021
Docket20-2523
StatusUnpublished

This text of Francisco Leon Lux v. Jeffrey A. Rosen (Francisco Leon Lux v. Jeffrey A. Rosen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Francisco Leon Lux v. Jeffrey A. Rosen, (8th Cir. 2021).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 20-2523 ___________________________

Francisco Leon Lux; Melissa Esmeralda Leon Mejia

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioners

v.

Jeffrey A. Rosen, Acting Attorney General of United States1

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________

Submitted: January 11, 2021 Filed: January 14, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________

Before KELLY, MELLOY, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Guatemalan native and citizen Francisco Leon Lux, individually and on behalf of his minor child, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration

1 Jeffrey A. Rosen is now Acting Attorney General of the United States, and is substituted as respondent pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c). Appeals (BIA), which dismissed his appeal from an immigration judge’s (IJ’s) decision denying his motion to terminate removal proceedings and ordering removal. His sole challenge is that, based on Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018), the IJ lacked jurisdiction over the removal proceedings. We agree with respondent that Lux’s challenge is foreclosed by this court’s precedent. See Ali v. Barr, 924 F.3d 983, 985-86 (8th Cir. 2019) (holding that decision in Pereira “had nothing to say about when an [IJ] obtains jurisdiction” over removal proceedings; jurisdiction vests when charging document, such as notice to appear, is filed with immigration court; and under 8 U.S.C. § 1003.18(b), notice to appear must contain time, place, and date information for initial removal hearing only “where practicable”). Accordingly, the petition for review is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Pereira v. Sessions
585 U.S. 198 (Supreme Court, 2018)
Yonis Ali v. William P. Barr
924 F.3d 983 (Eighth Circuit, 2019)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Francisco Leon Lux v. Jeffrey A. Rosen, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/francisco-leon-lux-v-jeffrey-a-rosen-ca8-2021.