Shalaby v. Gonzales

Ninth Circuit

Shalaby v. Gonzales

234 F. App'x 692

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJune 19, 2007

DocketNo. 04-75258

StatusPublished

This text of 234 F. App'x 692 (Shalaby v. Gonzales) 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.

Bluebook

Shalaby v. Gonzales, 234 F. App'x 692 (9th Cir. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Tamer Sobhy Benyamin Shalaby seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his asylum application. The BIA issued a final order of removal on September 14, 2004, and Benyamin Shalaby filed his petition for review on October 15, 2004, one day beyond the thirty-day filing deadline. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1). Because the record contains no sworn verification by counsel that he actually faxed a copy of the petition one day before the deadline and no such copy is on file, we must dismiss the petition for review as untimely. See Sheviakov v. INS, 237 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.2001) (“Th[e] deadline for filing [a petition for review] is jurisdictional, and so there is nothing we can do about it if the filing came one day late.” (footnote omitted)).

DISMISSED.

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

ORDER

Tamer Sobhy Benyamin Shalaby seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his asylum application. The BIA issued a final order of removal on September 14, 2004, and Benyamin Shalaby filed his petition for review on October 15, 2004, one day beyond the thirty-day filing deadline. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1). Because the record contains no sworn verification by counsel that he actually faxed a copy of the petition one day before the deadline and no such copy is on file, we must dismiss the petition for review as untimely. See Sheviakov v. INS, 237 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.2001) (“Th[e] deadline for filing [a petition for review] is jurisdictional, and so there is nothing we can do about it if the filing came one day late.” (footnote omitted)).

DISMISSED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

234 F. App'x 692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shalaby-v-gonzales-ca9-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack