Jaqueline Aparecida Mendes v. U.S. Attorney General

Opinion

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 24-10199

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

JAQUELINE APARECIDA MENDES, ELIEL SANTOS CHAGAS, MYLENA MENDES CHAGAS, Petitioners,

versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

____________________

Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

2

2 Opinion of the Court 24-10199

Agency No. A220-735-150

____________________

Before WILSON, GRANT, and LUCK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction . The 30-day statutory time limit established in the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) required the petitioners to file a petition for review of the November 30, 2023, decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming their order of removal on or before January 2, 2024. See INA §§ 101(a)(47), 240(c)(1)(A), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(a)(47), 1229a(c)(1)(A); INA § 242(b)(1)-(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1)-(2); Fed. R. App. 26(a)(1)(C); see also Dakane v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 399 F.3d 1269, 1272 n.3 (11th Cir. 2005) (“[A] petitioner has 30 days from the date of the final order of removal to seek review in this Court.”). However, the petitioners did not file the petition for review until January 22, 2024. Thus, the petition for review is untimely as to the BIA decision and we lack jurisdiction to review it. See Fed. R. App. P. 15(a)(1); Chao Lin v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 677 F.3d 1043, 1045 (11th Cir. 2012).

All pending motions are DENIED as moot. No petition for rehearing may be filed unless it complies with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all other applicable rules.