Juan Martinez-Marroquin v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General

489 F.3d 778, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 12845, 2007 WL 1582955
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedJune 4, 2007
Docket06-4380
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 489 F.3d 778 (Juan Martinez-Marroquin v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Juan Martinez-Marroquin v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General, 489 F.3d 778, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 12845, 2007 WL 1582955 (6th Cir. 2007).

Opinion

ORDER

The petitioner seeks judicial review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his motion to reopen his removal proceedings and rescind an immigration judge’s in absentia order of removal. The petitioner’s proof brief was filed on March 26, 2007. The respondent now moves to remand this case to the BIA to consider the issue of whether the petitioner carried his burden to demonstrate that the in absentia order of removal should be rescinded pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(C)(ii) because he did not receive notice of the removal hearing. The petitioner does not oppose the motion.

The effect of a remand is to render the BIA’s decision nonfinal “and hence not judicially reviewable.” Ren v. Gonzales, 440 F.3d 446, 448 (7th Cir.2006). A remand will not, however, result in the loss of the petitioner’s right to judicial review. See Lopez-Ruiz v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d 886, 887 (9th Cir.2002). In view of the foregoing circumstances, we find the respondent’s motion to be well taken. The petitioner is cautioned that if the BIA does not rule in his favor, a new timely petition for review must be filed.

The motion for remand is GRANTED.

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

Related

K-E-S-G
29 I. & N. Dec. 145 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 2025)
Rangel-Perez v. Holder
523 F. App'x 509 (Tenth Circuit, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
489 F.3d 778, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 12845, 2007 WL 1582955, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/juan-martinez-marroquin-v-alberto-r-gonzales-attorney-general-ca6-2007.