Herrera Calle v. Garland

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: March 1, 2023
• Docket: 22-60388
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 22-60388 Document: 00516661062 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/01/2023

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED No. 22-60388 March 1, 2023 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk Guillermo De Jesus Herrera Calle; Brahyan Herrera Ruiz; Dione Julieth Ruiz Arias,

Petitioners,

versus

Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General,

Respondent. ______________________________

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A206 389 051 Agency No. A206 389 052 Agency No. A206 389 053 ______________________________

Before Stewart, Dennis, and Willett, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Guillermo De Jesus Herrera Calle petitions this court for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying a motion to reconsider a decision overturning an Immigration Judge’s grant of asylum and

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 22-60388 Document: 00516661062 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/01/2023

No. 22-60388

withholding of removal and remanding for consideration of eligibility for relief under the Convention Against Torture. 1 We must always be aware of our jurisdiction. Zhao v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 295, 302 & n.3 (5th Cir. 2005). Under our statutory authority, we may review a “final order of removal” in immigration proceedings. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1); see Moreira v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 709, 713 (5th Cir. 2007). Our jurisdiction to review final orders of removal “encompasses review of decisions refusing to reopen or reconsider such orders.” Mata v. Lynch, 576 U.S. 143, 147 (2015) (internal citations omitted). Because Herrera Calle’s petition for review challenges neither a final order of removal nor a “decision[] refusing to reopen or reconsider” a final order of removal, Mata, 576 U.S. at 147, we lack jurisdiction over it. See § 1252(a)(1). The petition for review is DISMISSED.

_____________________ 1 The other petitioners were derivatives on Herrera Calle’s application for relief.